Jeor

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.

Well, Australia looks like they'll retain the Ashes with a washed out Day 5, but I'm glad they got on for 30 overs yesterday. The Marnus century and the 100-run partnership with Marsh, in appalling conditions (wet, overcast, poor light, change of ball to one that swung), will go some way to amending the moral outcome of the match and was the first real sign of fight from the Australians. It should perk them up for a good Fifth Test contest. Trailing by 60-odd with only 5 wickets in hand (albeit still with two recognised batsmen at the crease and one more to come in a deep batting lineup) is definitely well behind in the match, but not absolutely hopeless. Even if there was unlimited time it probably dispels the myth that an English win would have always been the inevitable outcome. Either way I think there's still plenty to play for in the Fifth Test. Australia will want to prove they earned a series win.

Bad luck for Bairstow but he was probably lucky enough to get that close given Stokes didn't declare at lunch. For the record even if Australia escape with a draw, I think Stokes made the right decision. Now it is absolutely certain England won't have to bat again whereas if he had declared earlier, they would have to worry about Australia scoring and potentially earning the draw more easily if someone like Mitch Marsh caught fire for an hour. And it looks like there's going to be some play...!

The lead is now 232 and they've pushed Jimmy Anderson out to bat, so it's clear that England want as big a score as possible and not have to bat again. Given the Aussies got a lot of movement with the new ball, and the cloud cover does come over periodically, they'll fancy their chances at bowling the Aussies out for an innings victory. The Australian team must be pretty tired. Cummins in particular doesn't have the spark and looks a bit down on pace, but it's hard to rest your captain. 2-2 would make for a very interesting final Test, but at this rate the fortunes of the two teams are moving in very opposite directions. Australia started the series strongly but have fallen away quite badly and have lost their world-class spinner. England were shooting themselves in the foot and a mess, but they regrouped in the Third Test, have been bowling far better with Wood and Woakes coming off the bench and looking more incisive, and have been absolutely dominant in this Test. This won't bode well for Australia if they go to the decider at 2-2.

Comprehensive day for England and they have full control of this match. This was the sort of day where we saw Bazball in absolutely full flight - even as an Aussie I have to say it was pretty impressive. Australians were very poor in the field. They're really, really missing Nathan Lyon. You can bet he would have broken up some of those partnerships or at least posed a different question to the batsmen. He would go for the odd 6 but he'd also create chances and the right-arm pace just looks very samey and blunt. Cummins himself was probably one of the worst bowlers. Also a bit disappointing there weren't many ideas in the field to change things up. Bazball was the go for he whole day and there didn't seem to be many creative ideas to challenge it. Australia may yet be rescued by the rain (Days 4/5 look like they have a chance of being completely washed out) but they're still going to have to earn it. They'll need to control the run rate to stretch the English innings out as long as possible and even then they're going to need to put in a solid batting performance in the third innings. England will probably look to build the lead to 200 in the first session and then have a bowl at Australia after lunch and see if they can collect as many wickets as possible before stumps.

England slowly inching in front in this match. Australia's batting was a big disappointment - lots of starts and actually reasonably good conditions for batting for once, but no one went on with a big score. They seemed to bat better against Wood but then Woakes popped up with a five wicket haul. It looked like 400 was a par score but they're about 100 runs short of what they should have achieved. England have opened up fairly brightly and it's another good day for batting. With weather set to wreak havoc on the last couple of days of the Test, they'll be wanting a big first innings score, bat through today and a bit of next, score 450+ and then bowl Australia out without a chase, especially if they can get some rain-interrupted overs in which will be hard for the Aussie bats.

Not having a spinner at Old Trafford is definitely odd, but I think the Aussies must have looked at the weather forecast (which seems particularly grim for Days 4 and 5) and thought it probably won't matter too much. In terms of handling spinners, Cummins has gotten better at relying on Nathan Lyon but as I think most captains would, isn't the best at trusting a young up and coming spinner especially when the opposition is being aggressive. I still don't get England's aversion to using both Tongue and Wood. Pace has been shown to trouble Australia and both of them have it in spades. I know they're worried about the batting lineup (hence the inclusion of Woakes instead) but I still think it would have been worth it. As it is, I think they've stacked the bowling too much (Anderson, Broad, Wood, Woakes, Moeen) and they're clearly compensating and planning for Stokes not bowling. Australia have gone the other way around and strengthened the batting but I'm not sure Marsh/Green will really be able to be that menacing as a combined fourth seam option. That being said, it would have been hard to leave out Marsh and they clearly planned for Green to be a permanent fixture in the side, and with the weak batting performance vs Wood the selectors obviously thought they needed a bit more batting depth. The forecast doesn't look great so this could be set for a draw, but with Australia's scoring rate (and England's likely rate) there could be a result even if the last two days are pretty rain affected. England win a fourth toss in a row...but if the sun stays out Australia won't mind.

Resurrecting this...so it looks like inflation is coming down globally without too much damage to the economy. Maybe the soft landing is here after all! I think there will still be some trouble brewing ahead but maybe not in a cataclysmic sense. There is still a lot of debt being carried out there and some of that will come home to roost. I feel like our next financial crisis will likely come from an external factor (e.g. a hot war, or another US government issue) than from financial factors.

In my single days I met a few Boarders, though I think I only went to about 2-3 events - but they were all great! Bullock is a good choice for the RBA. Lowe will never be forgiven for the error of saying rates would stay down until 2024, and that one error has cost him dearly and would have made his continuation publicly untenable. I think most people would agree he made the right policy decisions even if his communication wasn't great. So with him being replaced, I think Bullock is a good choice both for morale of the organisation itself and for the change she'll be able to bring as an insider. While most people think an outsider is the best person to drive change, for an institution like the RBA which is heavily staffed by careerists and RBA lifers, you really need a respected insider to do the heavy lifting.

Yes, a good win by England even though there were a few stumbles along the way. Both sides will like having a break before the next match - Australia to regather themselves and stop the momentum shift, England to let their wounded warriors heal and rest up. Sets up the last two matches in this series well!

Definitely a wobble but Woakes has steadied the ship here. I think Australia were always around 50 runs short of a par target. The loss of Lyon was a huge blow for this match - he would have been perfect for protecting a chase and tempting the lower order batsmen.

England definitely the favourites here, though I expect Australia might give them a scare as they get there. Still, a 2-1 series score is probably a fairer reflection of how things have gone. Australia gave away a few opportunities to go ahead in this game.

The rain interruptions will be good for England, who needed to rest their bowlers and give time for their walking wounded to recover rather than being out on the field. Unless 2 or more whole days get rained out from the remaining 3 days, I don't see it affecting whether we get a result. Both first innings were very quick - Australia in two and a half sessions and England in two.

Just when you think Australia are getting back on top, Labuschagne and Smith throw their wickets away with two incredibly casual shots. The lead isn't yet 100 and 7 wickets in hand, on a pitch where runs can come quickly. I think a target of 300 might be even odds, Australia will want 350 or more.

And that's the innings wrapped up, what a topsy turvy match this has been. The momentum has changed at least four times I reckon - England on top with Australia 4/85 at lunch, Australia on top with Mitch Marsh's century, England on top cleaning up the tail and bundling Australia out for 263, Australia on top having England 8/167, then England dragging it back with Stokes helping the last 2 wickets to stretch 70 runs. Now it's pretty much dead even and a lot will depend on the Aussie top order being able to set a platform and whether England can repeat their excellent first innings bowling performance. It does seem now that the balance of the English side was done to accommodate Stokes not bowling - he looked in a lot of trouble while batting. The bonus being that now they're covered for Robinson's likely not bowling as well now. They better hope Wood or Moeen's recent injuries don't flare up again.

The two drops off Murphy's bowling were tough chances I think. Generally the Aussies have pulled off better catches than the English. England wasted a big opportunity today, but they're still not out of it with the first innings likely to come close to parity. If Wood bowls as well as he did before, they'd fancy a chase.

Yes. What's happened with Archer - is he completely all washed up now? The Australians have always been susceptible to top-line pace. Yesterday's play (second session aside) it felt very much like the last 20 years in England, with a wicket coming every ball. It wasn't just Wood either; the fact that he has the batsmen jumping at one end seems to invigorate the other bowlers too. Woakes is also a touch faster than Anderson which must help a bit, too. Woakes has bowled reasonably well but if they had batting depth to swap Tongue in, it would have been very interesting to see Tongue and Wood both running in. In that sense you could say the Aussies made hay while the sun shined by winning those first two Tests with Wood out. Then again you could also say the same for England with Lyon out for the last three. Second day at Headingley and the forecast and conditions are supposed to be the best for batting. With a fast outfield, the Aussies will want to snaffle at least a couple of quick wickets to get into Moeen and the tail, otherwise Root/Bairstow/Stokes are more than capable of doing a Mitch Marsh-type number on them and erasing two thirds of that 200-run deficit by lunch and then launching an attack for building a healthy first innings lead by tea.

Game is in the balance, although maybe England are slightly ahead if you consider the three wickets to have fallen are the "cheaper" ones of Crawley, Duckett and Brooks. The Big Three (Root, Bairstow, Stokes) are all still in play and England will fancy their chances of getting a first innings lead with them and a strengthened tail of Ali and Woakes. My predictions of Wood cleaning up the tail handily were true. England will be happy with that result of bowling Australia out for 260 odd, although to be fair without the Marsh and Head dropped catches it would have been more like 120! Australia will need to have a plan for how to deal with Mark Wood. Their top order batsmen have to blunt him and wear him out more, although Stokes managed his workload well with short, sharp spells and not overusing him.

Yes if they got both of them, the score would've been around 6/100 and Australia would have been looking at a 150 score. Regardless how the rest of this innings goes, shows it was a good call by Stokes to bowl first, the execution just didn't come off right. I wonder how serious Robinson's situation is. Stokes might still not have to bowl as they'll have three seamers and a spinner, and Australia are scoring so quickly this innings probably won't last more than the day's play. He's clearly trying to manage Wood's workload though to keep him fresh, so if Robinson is out then Stokes may well have to bowl. I forget the rules when you're off the field and how long you have to wait before you can bowl again.

And Marsh is out on the stroke of tea. 118 at run a ball was scintillating stuff, a bit of Bazball Aussie style. 240/5 there's still hope for both sides. With Wood in the side, England have to fancy their chances at bundling out the last few wickets. If they can bowl Australia out for sub-350 then that would probably still be considered success.

What a difference a session can make. This 2nd session has completely reversed traffic - Marsh doing his best Stokes impression with 16 fours and 4 sixes in a single session so far. Galling for England is both batsmen should be out. Head had the legside catch that Bairstow put down and Marsh the straightforward first slip catch put down by Root. Cost 150 runs and counting so far. At the time, with the momentum firmly with England and Wood firing up the speed gun, you would've fancied England to clean up the tail handily. Both sides have dropped catches but England have done a few more, I think, and they've been more regulation ones dropped.

Excellent start by England - winning the toss, bowling first and this time making major inroads with Australia 4/83 with the top 4 batsmen all gone. Mark Wood is steaming in, it's a very quick outfield and seems like the atmosphere is very much set for Bazball and a fast scoring game. England will be feeling very good about this first session. It has the feeling of a wicket every ball...

Supposedly Mitch Marsh is in for Cam Green. A bit of a surprise but makes some sense in that they've always wanted to manage Green's workload. Marsh would (supposedly) add more in the batting department, not that he's been in great form lately, and is less of a bowler than Green is. But if the game's going to be rain-interrupted maybe they're not so fussed about getting some overs out of the all-rounder.

England have done well at wrapping up the back end of the Australian innings (except for 2nd innings Edgbaston of course), but they haven't made inroads into the top order as much. We're only four innings into the series but Warner/Khawaja seems to be a more solid opening partnership too. It may be partly due to Anderson's ineffectiveness so I suspect England may improve in the Third Test. EDIT: If Australia are smart about this, they could actually use the atmosphere to their advantage. So long as they themselves can block out the crowd abuse and constant jeering (which can be hard), a bloodthirsty crowd will actually also put some pressure on England. What with Bazball et al, the crowd will want to see English sixes soaring over the rope and Australians getting bounced into oblivion. Murphy might be able to goad a few over-aggressive shots, or if they tie down the scoring, impatience might start to build. If Australians continue to bat solidly, English bowlers could tire themselves out with a bumper barrage. So as much as the crowd will be on England's side, the English team are going to have to navigate it carefully too.