Cricket 42: The answer to life, the universe, and the inevitable English batting collapse

[Impmk2]

If Australia don't get at least 300 after that start they'll be rueing it. Good fight back by England.

[Paxter]

8 minutes ago, Impmk2 said:

If Australia don't get at least 300 after that start they'll be rueing it. Good fight back by England.

I wonder whether the Leach tactic was worth it. Yes they got some easy runs and dented his confidence, but they also gave away the wicket of the guy most likely to score a big ton.

[Impmk2]

Head has really steadied Australia. Playing some ODI.

Oh there goes Cummins. Still it's getting away from England. 

[Jeor]

Hah - I did jinx Warner! Excellent. I'd rather he didn't get a century again.

3 hours ago, Impmk2 said:

Head has really steadied Australia. Playing some ODI.

Totally agree with this. Travis Head's knock has been absolutely crucial. For a little while there it looked like England could restrict the lead to less than 100, then have the opportunity to get themselves back into the game with a good batting innings. Head's very quick 100 (85 balls I think) has just taken it away from them again. 

In many ways the Head century was very Gilchristian. That legendary Australian team often relied on Gilchrist to come in and bludgeon them out of trouble when they'd lost a few wickets in the middle order, and by the end of the day's play everyone would have forgotten that the situation actually was quite precarious at the time.

As it is, leading by about 200 runs makes it very hard for England to win from here. If Head/Starc can squeeze another 50-100 out of the tail that would obviously be the cherry on top - in terms of both the lead, but also in hogging the good batting time on the pitch. On the England side, they need to clean this tail up quickly (which can happen - Starc doesn't necessarily hang around long, and neither do Lyon or Hazlewood) and put together a score of 350+ to give themselves a chance.

Long term, they'll also be worrying about whether Stokes is fully fit. The 1/95 off 11 overs from Leach will have dented his confidence, but he's got a chance of making amends in the second innings. @Paxter, I think the Leach tactic worked in the end - he only got one wicket, and they now lead by 200 thanks to Head - but I agree at the time of the middle order wobble it looked like a miscalculation.

[Paxter]

Oh for sure, the Leach tactic worked in the end. I doubt he will be selected again in the series.

It was very astute from Langer and co. because they know that Root values control above all else from his spin option. That was why Root lost faith in Bess over the winter. 

Personally, I was massively in favour of England picking a spinner because I think Australia can be vulnerable in that area (as last summer showed). But clearly it didn't work on this occasion. 

[Xray the Enforcer]

Mr. X just texted me "I see that England currently trail Travis Head." 

[Paxter]

I know there’s a problem when I look at Hameed’s scores of 25 and 11* and think…he’s had a pretty good first Ashes outing!

[Jeor]

@Paxter has just sealed Hameed's fate! Strangled down the leg side, what a way to go.

Australia do have a weakness against quality spin, I think the problem is that England have struggled to produce the "quality" part. Players like Bess, Leach, Moeen Ali don't strike fear into the heart of batsmen. Monty had his moments but probably Graeme Swann has been the best spinner for England in the past 20 years and it's no coincidence he's the only one who has had (I think) some success against the Australians.

[Impmk2]

Root and Malan starting to dig England out of this hole. Be surprised if they do enough to make this game competitive, but looking more promising for the rest of the series.

[Jeor]

Yes, great stand by Root/Malan. The deficit is now only 50-odd runs and to be only 2 wickets down, they still have a chance of setting a half-decent target. The Australian batting lineup did show a potential to wobble (steadied by Head) so they don't have to set a massive target to feel like they have a chance.

Root was always the danger man, but Malan also seems to play well against Australia. I was surprised to see his sub-30 career batting average because against Australia he's averaging a healthy 47 with one century and four 50s in 11 innings.

 

[Mosi Mynn]

Oh, thank f&*%.

England do love to make things difficult for themselves!  

Great fight back by Root and Malan.

[Paxter]

Malan is an interesting player. Since he got dropped from the test team he’s matured a lot as a player, made a mountain of white ball runs and risen to the top of the T20 batting rankings. Unfortunately he struggles in English conditions and therefore they have been reluctant to select him. But maybe in his second coming he can push past those difficulties.

[ljkeane]

11 hours ago, Paxter said:

I know there’s a problem when I look at Hameed’s scores of 25 and 11* and think…he’s had a pretty good first Ashes outing!

Objectively speaking he hasn't had a particularly spectacular match but he has looked quite composed and in control of his game which is important for Hameed. We know he's got potential but his head seemed to have completely gone with the way his form totally fell apart and when he first came back into the England side against India he did look a bit of a rabbit in the headlights. To see him looking reasonably solid under the pressure of a first Ashes test in Australia, especially with the wickets tumbling at the other end in the first innings, is a pretty decent sign I think.

An Australian win is still by far the most likely result but good to see England at least offering some resistance.

Also what's going on with the technology in this test? Apparently the front foot no ball cameras just haven't been working and they don't seem to have real time snicko either?

[Paxter]

I’m not sure if this is the reason, but I know there have been a lot of problems with cricket-related technology during the pandemic. Interstate travel is a prerequisite to moving specialist people and equipment across a sparsely populated continent-country (even a cricket-mad one).

[ljkeane]

On Jack Leach Jarrod Kimber's got an article on cricinfo today on how much of an odd selection he was by England in the first place. He's been saying similar things about Leach for a while but basically Leach is a good bowler in very specific circumstances, on pitches offering assistance to the spinners and against right handers, neither of which are going to apply much in this series. Australia's tough for the spinners anyway but looking at that Australian top order with 4 left handers and two of the right handers are Smith and Labuschagne it's hard to see how it was ever going to go well.

[Paxter]

2 hours ago, ljkeane said:

On Jack Leach Jarrod Kimber's got an article on cricinfo today on how much of an odd selection he was by England in the first place. He's been saying similar things about Leach for a while but basically Leach is a good bowler in very specific circumstances, on pitches offering assistance to the spinners and against right handers, neither of which are going to apply much in this series. Australia's tough for the spinners anyway but looking at that Australian top order with 4 left handers and two of the right handers are Smith and Labuschagne it's hard to see how it was ever going to go well.

I understand the above but I think there are a couple of decent counter-arguments. One is that Jadeja and Ashwin provided a great template last year on how you can beat Australia in their own conditions - rotate the quicks in short, sharp spells while using accurate spin to choke the likes of Marnus and Smith. Jadeja is a similar sort of bowler to Leach and he went at 2.5 runs per over last summer. Two is that Root has been guilty of bowling his fast bowlers into the ground (maybe at the cost of Archer's career). Doing that in England is one thing, but doing it under the Aussie sun is another. So playing Leach gives you the ability to (in theory) save guys like Wood from bowling too much.

Now obviously this hasn't panned out at all in this test match, mainly because Australia successfully got after Leach in the 60 or so deliveries he has bowled. But that took guts and could have backfired. And Leach still has more wickets in the match than Lyon. So I don't know if it's quite as bad as Kimber is making out. The one thing I will admit though is that the 'Gabba was probably the worst pitch to start Leach on. It is pretty fast-bowler dominant these days and doesn't deteriorate much. 

 A few other stray thoughts as this test match enters its final throes:

• The Warner and (maybe?) Hazlewood injuries could hurt Australia and potentially square the ledger in terms of Stokes being underdone/not match fit. 
• I think Pope should be promoted to 5. He is wasted at 6. Particularly with Stokes out of practice. 
• Burns not facing the first ball for the first time in a non-night watchman scenario was interesting. Some mental blows have been inflicted there. 

[williamjm]

14 hours ago, Jeor said:

Yes, great stand by Root/Malan. The deficit is now only 50-odd runs and to be only 2 wickets down, they still have a chance of setting a half-decent target. The Australian batting lineup did show a potential to wobble (steadied by Head) so they don't have to set a massive target to feel like they have a chance.

Root was always the danger man, but Malan also seems to play well against Australia. I was surprised to see his sub-30 career batting average because against Australia he's averaging a healthy 47 with one century and four 50s in 11 innings.

I think the game is still gone but at least some of the England's batsmen are getting a bit of time in the middle and confidence which may help later in the series.

[ljkeane]

Fuck’s sake. This didn’t take long to go wrong.

[Paxter]

Yeah pretty frustrating. I still think the Day 3 performance gives England some hope for the series. 

[Paxter]

Jeez Lyon with four. That does not bode well.