2013 Ashes draft, part 3: Nature's Lower Middle Order

Selection 8

Matt - Again, I’d like to strengthen the bowling and with that - and to my disappointment, considering the nagging suspicion I harbour that he benefits more from others’ leadup work than his own - Steven Finn joins my XI.  It was a toss-up between him and Bresnan, and rumours seem to suggest that Finn is more likely to play than the Yorkshireman.  I’m not in love with the selection, but with seven players left (including four Aussie batsmen), this is the best I’m going to get.

Dave - With a press release rather unceremoniously uprooting Nick Compton as a member of England’s chosen opening partnership, it seems Jonny Bairstow is a shoe-in to start and bat at number 6. While KP was away, the Yorkshireman did an amicable job and the promise - though it hasn’t got the nation as giddy as county teammate Root – is definitely there.

Selection 9

Matt - While Dave’s just taken the reddest player in the series, I’m stoked that my next pick - and maybe the series’ best ginger kid - is still available this late: Chris Rogers.  I’m not sure he’ll play - he should, especially now Boof Lehmann is the boss - but he can bat anywhere from 1-4 and if I were boss (which is all blogging is, really) he’d stride out at first drop when Shane Watson gets out to a moving ball. (This piece was written one day before Lehmann announced Rogers will open for the Aussies)

Dave - It’s only in recent days since we first did the draft that it looks as if Usman Khawaja might be struggling for a starting berth. I thought his close links to Lehmann through Queensland might make an outside chance. He has the technique to excel in England but does he have it mentally just yet? Time will tell.

Selection 10

Matt - We’re starting to get into a real pickle here.  The only players still left on my board are Haddin, who I’m bound to pick and therefore will go at 13 and not before; Ed Cowan, who I love, but would take an opening spot from Root or Cook; James Faulkner; Phil “involuntary shudder” Hughes or Nathan Lyon, who’s extraneous now I have Swann, Siddle, Starc and Finn.  I’ll take Faulkner - he’s young, unsullied and can contribute with both leather and willow.

Dave - I’m kind of edging my bets here with this pick. It’s between Bresnan and Finn for Engand’s final fast bowling spot and I already have who I currently view as the best three quicks in the series. Nevertheless Tim Bresnan is Mr Dependable for England in the longer format of the game. Averaging 31 with the bat and 32 with the ball makes him someone that will work nicely in this draft.

2013 Ashes draft, part 2: The foot soldiers

In part two of our inaugural Ashes draft, Dave Siddall of World Cricket Watch and I select those players that we'll win and lose with - the foot soldiers. Click here for the rules, and here for part one (the elite).

Selection 5

Matt - With Clarke gone, the rest of the batting talent available (bar one) doesn’t appeal.  So I’ll take the other closest thing to a certainty in both bowling lineups: Graeme Swann.  While I still believe in Nathan Lyon - and have fully invested in futures stocks in Ashton Agar - Swann is undoubtedly the best spin bowler in the matchup and you can bet he’ll bamboozle Hughes at least three times this series.

Dave - And there’s the first real facepalm moment of this draft. Graeme Swann should have been a pick of mine after Matt Prior as a major difference between the two sides. Onwards.  My friend and colleague Jonathan Howcroft recently described Shane Watson as the epitome of everything that’s wrong with Australian cricket. Based on Watto’s soap opera of recent years and fairly mediocre record that’s a harsh but fair assessment. Nevertheless a return to the opening spot should prove a fresh start. Watson, the reluctant bowler, is also a wicket taker (averages 30 with the ball) and if he decides to think more of the team’s needs rather than his own needs, he could provide some balance that Australia lacks. So much talent, let’s see it prove matchwinning for a change.

Selection 6

Matt - I’m so glad this player is here now; I’d held my breath for the last two picks hoping Dave would think I didn’t totally rate him: Joe Root.  The kid can play, and with the wayward tendencies of Mitch Starc and James Pattinson, a 500-run series is eminently on the cards.  This is also a double-edged sword (I hope) - meaning I think I’ve tagged the two most reliable openers available and now Dave’s stuck with Watson and … Cowan?

Dave - Facepalm moment two. With Matt picking Joe Root, I realise I’m going to be struggling and forced to pick any number of Australia’s wobbly top and middle order. Nevertheless I’ll pursue with a clear tactic of picking the best quick bowlers on display. Stuart Broad looked back to his best against New Zealand and if he can bowl the same slightly fuller length he could be the leading wicket taker in the series.

Selection 7

Matt - While my batting is pretty much exactly as I’d hoped (minus Clarke, of course), you can make a convincing argument that the two best “strike” bowlers play for Dave’s XI.  To that end, my seventh selection is Mitch Starc.  I’d prefer to compare Starc to a rich man’s Mike Whitney rather than Mitchell Johnson - comparing Mitch to anyone where I’m from is tantamount to pissing off Aaron Hernandez.  Despite an average of just over 34, he take wickets and should be suited to English conditions.  I’m not in love with his economy rate, however.

In case you're wondering, Mitch Starc's Economy Rate is fifth all time in Australia for bowlers who've taken over 10 Test wickets - 3.64.
— Matthew Wood (@balanced_sports) December 5, 2012

Dave - Face palm moment number 2. With Matt picking Joe Root I realise I’m going to be struggling and forced to pick any number of Australia’s wobbly top and middle order. So to break that trend, Ian Bell – once Australia’s and in particular Warne’s bunny – gets the nod. Considering his aesthetics and volume of runs, he’s the next best batsmen available.

My Favourite Cricketer: Chris Tavare by Gideon Haigh

In our continuing series My Favourite Cricketer, we invite cricket writers and bloggers to pay tribute to the players they remember most fondly.  This week respected journalist Gideon Haigh encouraged us to post the following excerpt by way of his entry.

Some years ago, I adjourned with a friend to a nearby schoolyard net for a recreational hit. On the way, we exchanged philosophies of cricket, and a few personal partialities. What, my friend asked, did I consider my favourite shot? ‘Easy,’ I replied ingenuously. ‘Back foot defensive stroke.’

My friend did a double take and demanded a serious response. When I informed him he’d had one, he scoffed: ‘You’ll be telling me that Chris Tavare’s your favourite player next.’ My guilty hesitation gave me away. ‘You poms!’ he protested. ‘You all stick together!’

Twenty years since his only tour here, mention of Tavare still occasions winces and groans. Despite its continental lilt, his name translates into Australian as a very British brand of obduracy, that Trevor Baileyesque quality of making every ditch a last one. He’s an unconventional adoption as a favourite cricketer, I’ll admit – yet all the more reason to make him a personal choice.

Tavare played thirty Tests for England between 1980 and 1984, adding a final cap five years later. He filled for much of that period the role of opening batsman, even though the bulk of his first-class career was spent at number three and four. He was, in that sense, a typical selection in a period of chronic English indecision and improvisation, filling a hole rather than commanding a place. But he tried – how he tried. Ranji once spoke of players who ‘went grey in the service of the game’; Tavare, slim, round-shouldered, with a feint moustache, looked careworn and world-weary from the moment he graduated to international cricket.

In his second Test, he existed almost five hours for 42; in his third, his 69 and 78 spanned twelve hours. At the other end for not quite an hour and a half of the last was Ian Botham, who ransacked 118 while Tavare pickpocketed 28. As an ersatz opening batsman, he did not so much score runs as smuggle them out by stealth. In the Chennai Test at the start of 1982, he eked out 35 in nearly a day; in the Perth Test at the end of 1982, he endured almost eight hours for 89.  At one stage of the latter innings, he did not score for more than an hour. Watching on my television in the east of Australia, I was simultaneously aching for his next run and spellbound by Tavare’s trance-like absorption in his task. First came his pad, gingerly, hesitantly; then came the bat, laid alongside it, almost as furtively; with the completion of each prod would commence a circular perambulation to leg to marshal his thoughts and his strength for the next challenge.

That tour, I learned later, had been a peculiarly tough one for Tavare. An uxorious man, he had brought to Australia his wife Vanessa, despite her phobia about flying. Captain Bob Willis, his captain, wrote in his diary: ‘He clearly lives every moment with her on a plane and comes off the flight exhausted. Add to that the fact that he finds Test cricket a great mental strain and his state of mind can be readily imagined.’ You didn’t have to imagine it; you could watch him bat it out of his system.

Tavare could probably have done with a psychiatrist that summer; so could I. Our parallels were obvious in a cricket sense: I was a dour opening batsman, willing enough, but who also thought longingly of the freedoms available down the list. But I – born in England, growing up in Australia, and destined to not feel quite at home in either place – also felt a curious personal kinship. I saw us both as aliens – maligned, misunderstood – doing our best in a harsh and sometimes hostile environment. The disdain my peers expressed for ‘the boring Pommie’ only toughened my alleigiance; it hardened to unbreakability after his 89 in Melbourne.

Batting, for once, in his accustomed slot at number three, Tavare took his usual session to get settled, but then after lunch opened out boldly. He manhandled Bruce Yardley, who’d hitherto bowled his off -breaks with impunity. He coolly asserted himself against the pace bowlers who’d elsewhere given him such hurry. I’ve often hoped for cricketers, though never with such intensity as that day, and never afterwards have felt so validated. Even his failure to reach a hundred was somehow right: life, I was learning, never quite delivered all the goods. But occasionally – just occasionally – it offered something to keep you interested.

You can find Gideon Haigh's books on Amazon.

Back to My Favourite Cricketer homepage.

My Favourite Cricketer: Glenn McGrath by Gary Naylor

In our continuing series "My Favourite Cricketer", SPIN Cricket and 99.94's Gary Naylor examines Glenn McGrath.

The more one looks at cricket, the less one sees. This strange, cooperative competition (played on a big field, between stumps set 22 yards apart; by eleven men on each team, but just two at a time; using ancient materials like wood and leather, and 21^st century technology like high-speed cameras and computer tracking) reveals a little, only to show you how much more it keeps hidden. And cricket is at its most coyly contrary whenever superlatives hove into view – the best, the fastest, the most graceful, the, in this case, favourite are all questions likely to generate more heat than light. Even if I limit myself to players I have seen (and I am doing so) I could make a case for the South African England man who batted for a few glorious years like a West Indian – KP; the sublime VVS Laxman, my admiration for whom I wrote of here; the terrible beauty of Michael Holding, especially when hunting in that fearsome pack, the subject of my favourite sporting photograph; the wholehearted local hero Ian “Bully” Austin, the last of the lads who looked like us, talked like us but happened to be international quality cricketers (okay, only just in Bully's case).

But I'm picking none of them, as I'm looking elsewhere in the landscape of our wonderful game to a place where resides a tribe of players from which every successful team needs one or two. I'm looking to a man who stood out even amongst a team of such men (some would say a nation) largely drawn from that tribe. To a man who played for Steve Waugh and Ricky Ponting and was head and shoulders over even them in the wiles of the tribe – ladies and gentlemen, I give you the Bastards' Bastard, Mr Glenn McGrath.

courtesy: telegraph.co.uk

Oh, but he was good though wasn't he?

Let's start with the numbers. There he is atop the list of Test wicket takers among the faster men with 563, clear by 44 of his nearest challenger, the indefatigable Courtney Walsh. Pidge ran in for over 13 years, slowing a little in later on, but tight to the stumps at delivery, always thinking, never letting the bastardness drop for a second. He paid just 21.64 runs for those wickets, bettered only amongst those with more than 300 wickets by the bowler who most resembled him in method, Curtly Ambrose, the bowler who resembled him most in thinking about cricket, Malcolm Marshall and the bowler who most resembled him in his unashamed willingness to express bastardness, Fred Trueman. He sent back 377 top six batsmen, 17 more than Anil Kumble one step above him on the all-time list and only three fewer than SK Warne. The key to winning Test matches is the taking of 20 wickets and the hardest to take are those at the top of the order – Glenn McGrath did the hardest job in the game better than anyone else.

bbc.co.uk

And never better or more bastardly than at Lord's in 2005. Having been whipped out for 190 on the opening day of The Ashes by England's adrenaline-fueled pace attack, Ricky Ponting turned to two metres of bastard at the Pavilion End and told him to get on with it. What he got was the McGrath method at its deceptively simple best – bowl a length that gives them nothing to hit and a line that means they have to play every ball, push them back in the crease, then pitch one up that does enough to move half a bat's width and the scoreboard was suddenly showing 21-5. Years and years of practice and experience went into that spell and it was driven by a competitive spirit that was always dialled up to ten and sometimes, as Ronnie Sarwan and a few others found out, could go to eleven.

That competitive spirit did not just manifest itself in a thirst for top order wickets that no opening bowler has matched, but in a willingness to challenge himself to (wait for it) step outside his comfort zone. He was never a batsman, but he knew he had to contribute, so he turned himself into a reliable late order blocker who once made a fifty (vs New Zealand) of which he was inordinately, and, for those of us who batted 11 because there was no 12, touchingly proud. He was never a fielder either, but took one of the best catches I'll ever see, this time diving out of his comfort zone.

Glenn McGrath was on the winning side in 84 of his 124 Tests and lost only one Ashes series (and the moment that turned that series England's way was the moment his ankle turned on a runaway cricket ball, an injury that kept McGrath out of the two Tests England won). Home or 

away, it hardly mattered to him – he paid less than 30 per wicket everywhere, except in his five Tests in Pakistan, where he still only went at 31. He was every bit as much of a bastard in ODI cricket as he was in Test cricket, never letting up. He played in four World Cup finals, winning three and going for less than four an over in the one he lost. Did the grind of English county cricket wear him down? Not a bit of it – his 2000 season playing for Worcestershire brought him 80 first class wickets at less than 14 and 34 one day wickets at less than 10. Truly, the bastardness was never turned off.

Except when he crossed the boundary rope on the way off the field. We then saw the man behind the bastard, the country kid who lived in a caravan to get a start in pro cricket, the loving husband nursing a terminally ill wife, the doting father, the eloquent speaker, the magnaminous victor, the gallant loser. And now the charity campaigner.

Glenn McGrath did two of the hardest things in cricket – knock the top off Test match batting line-ups and play like a total bastard on the field while being a decent bloke (more than that, really) off the field. For this double whammy, Glenn McGrath is my favourite cricketer.

Gary Naylor, whom you can tweet at @garynaylor999 and find writing for 99.94, Spin Cricket and Cricket on Five and talking at Testmatchsofa.com.

Book review: Bradman's Invincibles by Roland Perry

A re-post from our Book Review affiliate site, Books With Balls.

A number of cricket teams will live long in history, having books written about them and having their relative merits forever debated. The most recent of those, the Australians who dominated cricket for fifteen years to 2008 developed a storied reputation perhaps tarnished by a lack of quality lasting opposition. The West Indian team preceding them did the same for nearly twenty years.

Perhaps the most revered cricket team of all was the 1948 Invincibles, who completed an arduous six month tour of England without a loss. The tour was a perfect fusion of circumstances: Bradman's final First Class matches, a cricket-starved world following the Second World War needing non-combatant heroes and finally, a collation of talent probably unrivalled to that time.

In his work Bradman's Invincibles Roland Perry has created a work which, while perfunctory and informative, is also quite swayed by his own opinions. Perry, a renowned cricket writer who spent a number of years in conversation with Sir Donald Bradman and collaborated with him on several works, appears to think that Bradman's word on matters of cricket is absolute and completely true. He has taken every word he could trawl from The Don and turned it into a misguided four-hundred page tome with little point. What should have been a celebration has been turned into a trudging day-by-day commentary..

Bradman was undoubtedly the greatest cricketer of all time and even during the 1948 Invincibles tour where he turned forty, was Australia's best batsman. He has also suffered somewhat from revisionism, where posthumous revelations as to his character have begun to unfairly detract from his cricketing legacy. These "revelations" should only add to that legacy - of a genius batsman and excellent captain who wanted - and mostly got - his own way, often at others' expense. Any negative character traits are nonexistent on paper.

Relying on one source for the vast majority of one's sources is a mistake, both for one's credibility and entertainment. He has taken The Don's word as gospel in book which would have been much richer for an Old Testament, Letters and Apocrypha. Perry has little affinity for beautiful prose, writing economically, occasionally repetitively and with no flair for either detail or accuracy. His style expects the reader to be in constant wonderment at the achievements of that squad rather than providing the full picture demanded by such an seminal tour.

Neither has the skill of analogy, often comparing players across generations in a hackneyed and awkward style - even using the same comparison twice in three pages. There are several factual errors and those who opposed Sir Don Bradman's absolute rule are portrayed in an unflattering light. Though the book stretches to 430 pages, the last one-hundred and seventy of those is given over to potted biographies of the tourists and their vanquished opponents, which, while providing some interesting details is more an annoyance than enjoyable. This follows a passage where the author says it would be pointless to compare "Greatest Ever" teams and then proceeds to do so.

That's not to say that it is scarce of redeeming features. Bradman's Invincibles provides an interesting peek into some aspects of cricket in the late 1940s, where towels shoved under shirts and trousers became makeshift thigh and chest guards and breakfast in ration-enforced England consisted of half a piece of toast and a mushroom. The lack of "nets" was mildly surprising, but understandable given the amount of cricket played. Most surprising of all, perhaps, was that both Bill Johnston and Keith Miller often resorted to spin depending on the circumstances of the game; though this in itself is questionable given Perry's unfortunate failure to grasp the difference between leg- and off-cutters.

Bradman's Invincibles is hardly a revolutionary work. It holds interest - perhaps because it's the first cricket book I've read in months (years?) - but is disappointingly perfunctory and poorly rounded.

Golf balls - two stars - (hit repeatedly against a tank stand with a cricket stump).

Image courtesy the sadly departed borders.com.au

Pitching it up: The WACA

Ben Roberts of World Cricket Watch and Balanced Sports inspects the pitch at the WACA prior to the 3rd test.

When Mike Gatting won the toss and elected to bat in the second test of the 1986-87 Ashes series it was the first time that any captain had elected to bat first on the WACA pitch in 10 test matches. In fact, prior to this match from the 13 previous tests, only twice had the captain winning the toss elected to bat.

The pitch at the WACA is renowned as being one of the fastest and bounciest in the cricketing world. In conjunction with the pitch characteristics, the ‘Fremantle Doctor’ blows in off the Indian ocean during the afternoon, assisting bowlers looking to move the ball through the air.

Despite these attractions the WACA can breed a false sense of confidence within a fired up fast bowler. The highlights reel of the ‘Master Blaster’ Vivian Richards pasting the Australian attack all over the WACA in 1988 is a definite lesson to all bowlers that you can bowl too short on this pitch. Richards stroked a dominant 146 off only 150 balls, playing across the line with ease to anything short.

Bowlers allowing the conditions to complement their natural talents and attributes will succeed at the WACA. There is no need to force the pace. The Ashes test of 1986 saw success for Bruce Reid and Graham Dilley, both of whom were blessed with tremendous height and natural bowling actions. The metronomic Glenn McGrath is the leading wicket taker at the ground, and Western Australian fast bowler Jo Angel never appeared over-exerted in taking many WACA wickets throughout his first-class career.

More recent history at the WACA has seen the captain that wins the toss electing to bat more often. This perhaps is more a reflection of the Australian dominance and attacking psyche, but also could be influenced by the generally more sedate pitch preparation. The need for Australia to push for victory, combined with England’s fast bowling stocks, may render the toss irrelevant. Both sides are likely to elect that Australia should bat first.

With Stuart Broad now injured, and based on players who have been successful at the WACA, the English should strongly consider selecting Chris Tremlett. His 201cm height and ease through the crease appears a match made in heaven with the WACA pitch. Tremlett complementing Graeme Swann, Stephen Finn and James Anderson would still be a potentially dominant attack. This assumes Tremlett will be selected; Tim Bresnan and Ajmal Shazad are still in the touring party also. It’s a palatable problem to have for the tourists.

The options for Australia are less palatable. Bollinger, Siddle, Johnson and Harris are all attacking bowlers who enjoy pitching the ball short of a length; none seeming a great match for the WACA pitch. If the selectors had remained willing to make changes to the bowling lineup, a recent 9 wicket haul against Tasmania and an imposing 203cm height might have meant the South Australian Peter George could have been a worthy selection.

The English enter the Perth test with the better matched bowling attack for the conditions and a top-order in form. The best plan for the Australians will be for the thus far faltering top order to put scoreboard pressure on the English with a large first innings total.

What's gone right for Australia?

These are dark times for the Rebel Alliance. After the attack on the Death Star... No, hang on, that's The Empire Strikes Back.

The reference may be valid anyway. One team has dominated the other so far this Ashes series and since Australia's crushing defeat at Hoth - sorry, Adelaide - and Simon Katich being frozen in carbonite - err, pulling up lame with achilles trouble - it appears as dark a time as can be remembered for the Australians. (I'm not suggesting England are actually evil, just dominant like the Empire were in the real Star Wars trilogy).

So without hint of jingoism it's time to examine after two Tests - one lamentably poor, the other suffering from one poor innings - what the Australians have done well through the start of this Ashes campaign. Obviously with Australian down 1 - 0 and with strife consuming the Baggy Green camp, the positives may be harder to find than negatives. To use Ricky Ponting's words - There are positives. To say what Ponting does not forces one to is to add - Australia is simply the inferior team this year. Although there are the following seven positives, it's unfortunate they come from a talent-deprived team and are overshadowed by negatives.

Nevertheless, on the plus side for the Australians are:

Mike Hussey's return to form

"Mr. Cricket" has been a millstone around Aussie necks for nigh-upon two years now, sprinkling poor performances with rigid batsmanship and an occasional impressive One-Day innings. He only made it into the First Test team by way of Khawaja and Ferguson failing to impress, yet has responded brilliantly: he's stroke-played, rather than ground out his scores. And best of all: he's the likeable Mike Hussey that Australia rallies around.

The Return of the Peter Siddle we all know and love

Peter Siddle's first innings hat-trick in Brisbane generated more hype than The Oprah Winfrey Show, yet in two subsequent innings he's been unable to reproduce the same bite and venom. That's not particularly surprising given his history of taking only a few wickets interspersed with occasional Michelles at Test level. What he does offer is abrasiveness, consistency - you know what you're going to get - and an optimism currently lacking in Mitchell Johnson's cricket.

Mitchell Johnson's omission from the Second Test

Harsh? No, not really. Because where we are as a cricket-playing nation is dependent on the whims and fragile confidence of Jess Bratich's boyfriend. When firing, Johnson is on a level with Dale Steyn as the best, most hostile fast men around. He was dropped for lack of form, but not discarded as having played out his usefulness like Jason Gillespie five years ago. His not playing in Adelaide hopefully will provide enough spark for him to rediscover his best form, but statements like "I need to get my head right" aren't inspiring - frankness regarding one's headspace just show how low confidence is, and how far one has to come to get back to full mental fitness.

Shane Watson's leadership

Hussey and Shane Watson, more than Ricky Ponting and much more than Michael Clarke have said what his team and the cricketing public of Australia have needed to hear: Australia have been second-best throughout this series. This comes from a man who two years ago I would have bet had played nearly his last Test for the Aussies and had less leadership ability than lettuce. Now an automatic selection, perhaps his nascent leadership ability could be used in the national setup.

Marcus North's failures at no. 6

Although affable, elegant and good captaincy material, Marcus North simply doesn't have what it takes to be a World Class number six batsman. Oh, for the days of Martin Love! Change is now inevitable at this position, and with North's career. That he has failed three times in three innings when Australia has needed him to fire means that he's now had enough chances. Only Simon Katich's injury - meaning Australia would perhaps take two "newbies" into the Third Test - may have saved his spot. An alternative: given Phil Hughes' shaky start to the Sheffield Shield season and North's past-life as an opener, it may be time to move him up the order to start the innings alongside Watson.

Brad Haddin

Personal opinion in cricketing circles vacillates between maintaining Haddin as 'keeper or going back to Tim Paine. Paine's injury obviously now precludes this, but so to does the form of the New South Welshman. Only two months ago he was a fading light but his application with the bat has earned him new respect.

The selectors' willingness to experiment

Xavier Doherty and Ryan Harris, two players who only three years ago were middle-of-the-road Sheffield Shield players are now Australian representatives, conjuring up memories of Simon Cook, Scott Muller and Matt Nicholson. But let's not forget that England have gotten their current attack to this quality by trying and discarding Sajid Mahmood, (Australia's) Darren Pattison, James Tredwell, Amjad Khan, Jon Lewis, Liam Plunkett, Shaun Udal and Ian Blackwell. In five years. Greg Chappell upset the Indian applecart by attempting to usher through new blood and it would seem he's intent on the same course as an Australian selector. All is not lost, Australia.

The battle is not yet half over. Given the disparity in consistent quality between the bowling attacks, Adelaide may well have always been the Test they were most likely to lose: it was where, should the bats fail, the bowlers would have the greatest difficulty getting them out of a mess.

But as a hopeful Return of the Jedi moment approaches for Australia as they move towards Perth, Melbourne and Sydney. It may be that Michael Clarke steps up to play Luke Skywalker (the one who's ostensibly the hero but still everyone thinks is a prat). Shane Watson could slide easily into that role also. The men in the Baggy Green would do well to focus on what they are doing well, rather than looking pessimistically at what they aren't doing.

Pitching it up: Adelaide Oval

by Balanced Sports columnist Ben Roberts.

The theory goes that South Australia's unorthodox yet supremely effective left-handed batsman Darren Lehmann would have played more for Australia, except that he played his first-class cricket on the Adelaide Oval. Lehmann throughout the 1990's was a batting colossus of the Australian domestic scene, yet waited until 1998 to make his Test match debut. Adelaide Oval is known (Lehmann may say 'tainted') as a batsman's paradise.

Adelaide's hot and dry weather provides challenge to the ground team to produce a pitch that is anything but rock hard in the summer months. Recent history has scheduled the Test match in early to mid December, away from the searing heat of late January. But early December in Adelaide is hot and dry enough.

The English may have had fond memories of the Adelaide Oval in 2006, if it wasn't for one Shane Warne. Seemingly to date, no Australian pitch can escape being defined at least in part by him. It takes a special bowler to not just succeed but dominate on the Adelaide pitch.

Wisden describes a match that went 4 days and 43 minutes toward a draw dominated by batsmen. Collingwood and Pieterson (206 & 158) for England, then Ponting and Clarke (142 & 124) for Australia, enjoyed the conditions to the full. England looked like batting out the final day to the draw until Warne stepped up and turned the match. He only took 4 wickets but created so much doubt in his 32 overs for 49 runs, the English batsman crumbled either to him or others eventually. Australia winning by 6 wickets with 19 balls to spare.

In a match that both batting line ups will be looking toward with anticipation, Graeme Swann looks the wildcard. From both sides Swann is the only slow bowler who has form for dominating batsmen. Spinners in general will be key; the expectation on them will be to bowl extensive and tight overs giving the pacemen a decent rest in the heat while carrying the attack to the batsmen.

Attacking batsmen Pieterson and Ponting may be worth watching. Pieterson will have fond memories of Adelaide in 2006, and Ponting has the greatest number of test centuries and highest total runs at Adelaide in test match history. English or Australian batsman under pressure should heed the warning that in such a friendly environment they will be expected to succeed. Should they fail, selection in the remainder of the series will not be guaranteed.

Australian batting failure may have Chairman of Selectors Andrew Hilditch dreaming of a left-handed South Australian who regularly put bowlers to the sword on the Adelaide Oval.

Great Memories: Australia at Home in 1974-75

Ben Roberts

Arguably Australian crickets favourite home Ashes series is the 4-1 victory over England in 1974-75. Regularly punctuated by savage assaults from Jeff Thomson and Dennis Lillee, the series has become as renowned for the uncomfort experienced by batsmen as for the result of the cricket played. Was there something more however to Australia’s victory (and England’s loss) than simply the hairy chested colonial brutality of Messrs Lillee and Thomson?

England arrived in Australia as holders of the Ashes. They had won them on their previous visit in 1970-71 thanks to their own hostile paceman Jon Snow. In between times the English had retained the urn in the home series against Ian Chappell's emerging team, despite being pushed all the way.

Brave decision making at the toss by Ian Chappell, electing to bat on an uncertain Brisbane pitch, displayed the intent of the Australian side who ultimately won by 166 runs. Hostile but wayward bowling by Australia in the English first innings allowed Tony Grieg to get the only century for the match. Despite the hostility of Thomson and Lillee, the leading wicket taker was the more medium than fast Max Walker, with 4 wickets. After Chappell declared the second innings leaving England 333 to win, the Australians bowled more directly. Thomson fired out six Englishmen including the first innings centurion Grieg.

England, brow-beaten after the first test and in need of reinforcements, turned to a pair of 42 year olds Colin Cowdrey and Fred Titmus on a lightning fast Perth pitch. Cricketing gentlemen Cowdrey staunchly responded to the fast bowling onslaught with the typically British stiff upper lip and cunning experience. Despite this, the English batting crumbled throughout the match and Doug Walters and Ross Edwards drove home the advantage by scoring centuries (Walters famously within one session). Australia's first innings of 481 was almost enough as they went on to win the test by 9 wickets.

The Melbourne test was the closest of the series. The match finished in a draw with Australia 7 runs behind and England only requiring 2 more wickets. All four innings, England 242 & 244 Australia 241 & 238 for 8, were a challenge for the batsmen. For Australia Ashley Mallett took 6 wickets for the match. The English's own aggressive fast bowler Bob Willis had 5 wickets in the first innings and Grieg claimed 4 wickets in the second.

What might have been considered 'normal service' resumed in Sydney. The Australian batsmen set up the 171 run victory with 405 and 4 declared for 289. Greg Chappell top scored in both innings with 84 and 144; Ian Redpath supporting him in the second with 105. Except for Alan Knott with 82 in the first, the English could only produce a series of starts in both innings. Consistent performances from all Australian bowlers continued including Mallett again, with 4 wickets for 21 from 16.5 overs in the second innings.

Lillee finally broke through in this test. After eight innings where he consistently returned 2 wickets he dismissed four batsmen in each innings at Adelaide. The major news from the match was the loss of Thomson after the first innings. As an example of the different times, Thomson was playing a social tennis match on the rest day when he injured his shoulder. Australia's regular English nemesis throughout the 1970's, Derek Underwood, took 7 wickets in Australia's first innings and 11 for the match. But with the English batsmen continuing to struggle (again Knott standing out with 106 in the second innings) Australia won easily by 163 runs.

With Thomson out injured before the match and Lillee injured after just 6 overs Walker shouldered the load after Australia had collapsed to be all out for 152 at Melbourne. Peter Lever took 6 wickets for England. Walker bowled 42 (eight ball) overs in the English innings, finishing with his career best figures 8 for 143. Fletcher and Denness took advantage of Lillee and Thomson's injuries and made big hundreds in England's only innings of 529. The Australians fought hard in the second innings, Greg Chappell making his second century for the series, but it was not enough and the Australians went down by an innings and 4 runs as the series concluded.

Most cricket historians enjoy documenting the terror in which Thomson and Lillee, with 33 and 25 wickets respectively, reaped on the English. I believe such a focus too much overshadows the performance of two Australian bowlers in Max Walker and Ashley Mallett. The returns of both of these bowlers, Walker 23 wickets in six tests and Mallett 17 in five, indicates that Australia's second line of attack provided little respite for beleaguered English batsmen.

Both Walker and Mallett were constants in the Australian side throughout the 1970's and have records that speak highly of their ability. More recent recollections of Walker's irreverent media career hide his cricketing return of 138 wickets in 34 tests. Mallett, a student of the game trading in Australia's least popular or conditionally assisted form of bowling, off-spin, took 132 in 38.

Australia had five players to England's four making greater than 300 runs for the series. But removing Denness and Fletcher, who made over half their combined runs during the favourable conditions of the sixth test, the English had only two. Greg Chappell led the way for Australia and for all batsmen with 608 runs for the series.

Except for the final test England did not pass 300 in an innings. The English side was by no means a weak line up. Names such as Amiss, Edrich, Luckhurst, Fletcher and of course Cowdrey were of some note however had little effect during the series. The ageing Cowdrey showed great courage in the second innings of the Perth test with 41, however that proved to be the best that he could do.

I have spent a lifetime of cricket-watching suffering with Tony Grieg at the microphone. Despite him being difficult to stomach in commentary he once was a genuinely good test all-rounder. For this series Grieg led the English batsmen with 446 runs and was equal leading wicket taker, with Willis and Underwood, taking 17 wickets.

Australia dominated with the ball but were ably backed up with the bat. The English, shell shocked, clearly underperformed. Forgotten was the relentless nature of Ian Chappell's captaincy. Chappell led solidly from the front with the bat and asked much of his team, including batting first on an uncertain Brisbane pitch. Despite their great performances Lillee and Thomson admit that even they were not exempted from criticism from Chappell at times.

At some point during every Australian home Ashes series the ghosts of 1974-75 will be revived and regardless of the present state of play Australian fans will bask in the glory of that victory each and every time.

Why they weren't picked

With the Australian side whittled down to thirteen as the first Test approaches, suddenly Callum Ferguson and (probably) Usman Khawaja have been left on the sidelines. The selectors have opted to stay with the same six batsmen who have led Australia to their current World ranking of fourth. The reason is simple: although the middle order has struggled mightily and watching Mike Hussey now reminds us all of David Boon's last, tedious, eyeball-stripping innings, neither the South Australian nor his younger New South Welsh counterpart have really made that final spot their own.

To look at Australia's last Test XI is to see mediocrity at several positions, namely in the middle order and the spin-bowling department. The team defeated in India will change, with Tasmanian Xavier Doherty replacing Nathan Hauritz on the strength of one good Sheffield Shield match and one outstanding ODI: his First Class figures aren't particularly impressive but he's performed well at the right time and thus has received the call.

The batsmen, however, are a different matter. Both Ferguson and Khawaja have had several chances recently to write their names in ink across the Aussie middle order yet have failed to do so; last week's paltry Australia A showings were the final nail in their collective coffins. Gone are the days of 1994-95 where Australia A were perhaps the second-best side in the World and this was proved emphatically at Bellerive as both "Next Best Things" surrendered their wickets to the English attack.

Khawaja or Ferguson would do well to heed the exploits of a young Damien Martyn. During the 1990s, an Australian had to force the selectors collective hands both with mountains of runs and with scores at the right time. The most striking example of this was in the early days of the West Indies 1992-93 tour. West Australian tyro Martyn was making runs for fun in the-then Mercantile Mutual Cup, in Shield matches and against a full-strength Windies pace battery in three separate matches. His front-foot slashes of Ambrose and Bishop to the extra cover boundary on a pacy WACA pitch were indelibly marked on my thirteen year-old brain as the most exciting cricket shots I'd ever seen. When the squad lists were submitted for the first Test at the 'Gabba, Martyn was there alongside an in-form Australian top six each of whom has claim to being an all-time great of the game. Martyn kept making runs and both popular and selector opinion was swayed immutably in his favour with a quickfire 36 against the tourists at Bellerive for the Australian XI. He made the team at the expense of Dean Jones.

It wasn't so much the weight of Martyn's runs that ensured his spot, nor the manner in which he scored them although his four-day Strike Rate nearing 100 was undoubtedly impressive. Damien Martyn was selected because he'd showed his readiness for the big time by making crucial runs in the right spots. When needing runs to cement his position, that one innings for Australian XI made not picking him a popular impossibility. The same stories apply with Matthew Elliott in 1997, Adam Gilchrist in 1999 and even Phil Hughes' 2008-09 domestic season: they made so many runs at the right time that Michael Slater, Ian Healy and Matthew Hayden were dumped so that Australia could progress. With mediocre recent form, neither Khawaja nor Ferguson have shown their mettle, posing the question: are they really ready? Are they ready to make the step up to Test match level?

As it happens, Usman Khawaja has been called up as an emergency replacement for a struggling Michael Clarke so we may well find out if he is ready anyway. Should Mike Hussey fail in Brisbane, we may find out how good a training-ground the Sheffield Shield really is. With many puzzling selections (and non-selections) over the past two years, it appears that Australia's selection panel has decided to award caps to guys they hope can do the job rather than to players they know can do the job. That's not their fault as there are more question marks over the strength of the Australian domestic competition than at any time since Packer - there isn't the same quality that inspires complete confidence in their delivering, so the next best thing is to plump for hope and call it development. What they can be pilloried for is the inconsistency with which they've applied this policy.

Neither Khawaja, Ferguson, Cameron White, Peter George, Mitch Starc or even Golden Child Steve Smith has forced the selection panel's to pick them even though Australia cries out for young talent to replace their ageing and tired top guns, now less howitzers and more derringers. Perhaps now we see more clearly why throughout the noughties so many Australian debutants have been aged in their late-20s and early-30s - the younger players just haven't had the responsibility that creates personal growth from an early age and so haven't taken it upon themselves to ensure their selection.

Crowdsourcing the 2010-2011 Ashes

This article can be found at World Cricket Watch and features opinions from the Balanced Sports team as well as reputed pundits from Test Match Sofa and the Reverse Sweep amongst others.

Pitching it up: The Gabba

by Ben Roberts, Balanced Sports columnist.

The Gabba's traditional role as host to the first test of the Australian summer reflects the desire to avoid scheduling matches in the south-eastern states while they struggle to exit winter conditions, even in late November. The Brisbane climate however is by no means smooth sailing for cricketers. The humid sub-tropical conditions provide risk of serious thunderstorm at its extreme and a pitch that has been known for its treachery in the past.

The potential for chaotic cricket at the Gabba can be defined by the Ashes test of 1950, a match that Wisden was led to describe as one that was 'won and lost at the toss'. The villainous pitch, according to Wisden, was the reason for the galling defeat of England who they believe were the better performed side.

Australia's captain Lindsay Hassett won the toss a elected to bat in what were the best conditions of the match. Australia however did not excel and was bowled out for a disappointing 228. The tropics then entered and sent a thunderstorm creating a minefield of the uncovered pitch. The Englishman were instructed by their captain Freddie Brown to attack lest they remain batting too long before getting a chance at the Australians on this now treacherous pitch.

The English declared their innings closed at 68 for 7, and proceeded to rout the Australian batsmen, Hassett ultimately calling time with Australia 32 for 7 in their second innings. England required 193 in their second innings for victory, and the pitch while improving, remained difficult. England's second innings closed at 122 giving Australia victory by 60 runs. Leonard Hutton was the only batsman to succeed from both sides in passing 50, his 62 not out in the second innings nearly brought victory for the English.

The modern techniques and objectives of pitch preparation, including heavily covered pitches, mean that test matches similar to the 1950 Ashes test stand little chance of being repeated. The humid climate of Brisbane still causes the pitch to sweat while covered which can create some difficulties.

Shane Warne described the Gabba as one of his favourite grounds, and he had tremendous success on the pitch. Warne however was an attacking spinner and took risks with his bowling. Graeme Swann for England will likely play and his attacking style could net him wickets. Australia does not have a counter for Swann with omitted Australian spinner Nathan Hauritz relying more on subtle variation then on outright attack in taking wickets. The inexperience of Xavier Doherty and Steve Smith may also mean that they will bowl with more caution.

The pitch is renowned for being friendly to bowlers looking to hit the seam. It presents probably the best opportunity for Australia's pacemen to out-perform the English who are more akin to using swinging conditions. Shane Watson could be a factor in the test for Australia, keeping the seam straight, as complement to the strike bowlers. Likewise if the Gabba decides to play up Paul Collingwood for England could prove a useful part time option.

A Fatal Four-way?

By picking two spinners in a squad of seventeen, Australia has shown its hand: they're going to play a tweaker in the first Ashes Test next week. Hardly startling news, but it leaves the question: why not play four fast bowlers? The 'Gabba traditionally takes pace very well and there is a convincing argument that the best four bowlers in the country (perhaps even the best seven) are speedsters.

Of course there are plenty of very good arguments against fronting up with a four-pronged pace attack: a team needs variety, a team needs a stock bowler unlikely to break down, the 'Gabba was Shane Warne's most preferred ground to bowl at outside the MCG ... wasn't it also one of the harbingers of the apocalypse? In fact, the arguments for it are probably 90% convincing: There's no question that a variety of arrows in the quiver of Ricky Ponting makes for a more balanced team and that Australia's best four quicks are remarkably injury prone. What's curious is that no-one's talking about it even as an option. There are reasons as to why it isn't a good idea so why not start looking for reasons as to why it has merit?

It comes down to only one reason. The first involves the now-obligatory mention of the West Indian sides of the 1970s and 1980s. The dominant Windies of that era played a pace quartet because it was their best way of taking twenty wickets whether they were at home, in Australia or in spin-friendly India. Their best seven or eight bowlers were fast men, so they played the top four. It was only when that top four included Cameron Cuffy and Kenny Benjamin that their reign ended - in order to work, this lineup needs four pacemen of absolute quality.

As Australia's pace stocks appear healthy with at least six fast men of International quality, why not try it? The best four would comprise Mitchell Johnson, Ben Hilfenhaus, Doug Bollinger and Peter Siddle, giving you one swing bowler, two honest triers and Johnson's loose cannon. It may or may not work, but it is at least worth evaluating.

Most cricket boffins would probably opt for the variety that a spinner brings to an XI and that's probably for the best. For the four-pronged pace attack to work, the bowlers involved have to be a class above the spinners they keep out of the side and with Australia that probably isn't the case. Succinctly, the increase in class has to be more than the decrease in variation. That said, the idea shouldn't be forever consigned to the scrapheap as the Baggy Green continues its search for A-list bowlers. Perhaps it's time for Australia, suddenly spoil'd for choice with speed-merchants, to at least consider the idea that they aren't forced by law to play a spinner.