November 26, 2010

Brisbane Test, 2010-11

Luck or strategy?

Alan Tyers and Jarrod Kimber

In the third Australia v England post, we crow about / pick over the ruins of England’s first innings at Brisbane. Jarrod will bowl first, appropriately enough…

Shane Watson celebrates after bowling Jonathan Trott, Australia v England, 1st Test, Brisbane, 1st day, November 25, 2010
Yes, his hair is annoying, and yes, him bowling a straight one was planned  © Getty Images
Enlarge

RELATED LINKS

Jarrod Kimber says I’d heard a lot about NuEngland. A team so professional that it was impossible for them to fail. Toilet breaks were sorted into groups and then analysed by a backroom staff of thousands. Nothing could go wrong. This was the team that would finally end the torture in Australia.

And then I see them at the Gabba.

Pathetic.

Ian Bell saved them. Ian Bell, the little ginger guy who hides behind his hat when talking to the media. Straussy did a Harmy, only with the bat. KP tried to get out to left-arm spin. Colly forgot to bring his shovel out with him. Prior and Broad just gave Siddle a birthday present.

As rubbish as England were in the 90s (that’s really pretty rubbish), if they sent out the worst English side from that period (it would probably be a tough decision) they’d have made at least 270 today at the Gabba. I was hoping for a contest. Now I’ll just have to enjoy the Brisbane weather.

Alan Tyers says Well, I can put up with a lot. But to compare this side, dreadfully though they may have batted on day one at Brisbane, to the mid-1990s shower… there is a limit. I imagine that Andrew Strauss’s team will pursue a class action libel lawsuit against Mr Kimber, and I for one hope they win. Nobody should be compared to Hicky and company without serious thought for the impact it could have on their families

England can take heart from two things, I guess. Firstly: aside from Peter Siddle, Australia’s bowling was pretty useless. Mitch was his statutory waste of eight pints of blood, Ben Hilfenhaus looked tame. And Xavier Doherty couldn’t even get Kevin Pietersen out.

Secondly, Australia got lucky. Until Siddle’s titanic efforts, they had been reduced to bowling wide of the stumps and hoping for mistakes. Okay, England obliged. But maybe they can learn from their mistakes. Birthday hat-tricks aside, this is still a very moderate Aussie team, and England cannot bat as badly again.

Jarrod replies “Lucky,” Tyers says? There was no luck about it, this was all in the plan. The Aussies have spent months working on their “short outside of off” plan to Strauss. And if you think Watson bowling a straight one was luck, then you just don’t know cricket. The only luck Australia had was the fact that the state of Victoria happens to be on their island.

Alan replies I dunno about this. Even a stopped clock gives the right time twice a day, and I reckon these solid-but-unspectacular seam attacks have a couple of excellent spells per series in them each, max. Sure, day one at Brisbane was Australia’s, but how many more top bowling performances have they got to come? England might have felt like they lost the series on day one, but they shouldn’t – and neither did Australia win it. As for Victoria, I expect Jarrod just likes the place because is named after one of Australia’s previous monarchs…

RSS Feeds: Alan Tyers and Jarrod Kimber

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by Anonymous on (November 27, 2010, 2:42 GMT)

@ George Jenkins ' Never mind, though. We can give the South Africans a good game.' Everytime England play you're generally giving at least two South Africans a good game.....

Posted by asimations on (November 26, 2010, 18:14 GMT)

both teams look ordinary the ashes go to trashes who care for over hyped contest

Posted by Rishabh on (November 26, 2010, 14:52 GMT)

England have every chance to get back..(which i hope they do) The aussies' bowling wasn't great sparing Siddle..If England bat well in their second innings.the game will be theirs.

Posted by Raj on (November 26, 2010, 14:24 GMT)

@Tushar,

Please go to your water cooler and listen to the arguments there. If you didn't understand this piece, or choose to ignore, why do you waste your time writing a comment on the article. You Indians will never understand the historical importance of the Ashes. If you don't want to read, then move on.

Posted by Adrian on (November 26, 2010, 14:10 GMT)

Sorry, but to write day one or two firmly in anyone's corner seems a bit premature. You can't say aus bowlers got lucky unless you are prepared to say the same for England. The fact is, we have 15/40 wickets down and I think both sides are in with a real chance- the most interesting thing for me was swann's treatment. If aussies can dominate him it puts alot of pressure on the 3 pacemen plus collingwood...

Posted by naushad on (November 26, 2010, 13:44 GMT)

This is cricket....but i still say that england in this ashes is far better team than australia.......u ll c in second inning in the way KP ll bat....i predict england win by 4-1 in this ashes......

Posted by Anonymous on (November 26, 2010, 10:18 GMT)

"England cannot bat that badly again"

Say , who was the last English batsman to average more than 50 in more than 15 Tests ....thinking ... thinking .... Right! Ken Barrington who retired in 1968.

Posted by abdullah farooqui on (November 26, 2010, 9:20 GMT)

i hope england play well in the next inning and win this match and than onwards win the series but also wants ponting to tons of runs in ashes so that he could come close to sachins record which somewhat is unbreakable

Posted by affie on (November 26, 2010, 9:10 GMT)

Aussies were better, luck factor is always there for everything, why call it a luck? did any umpiring decision was lucky or else? nothing like that, Aussies were better of the two and so are on top. hopefully all series will go like this, mean aussies on top. English are only paper lions.

Posted by usman on (November 26, 2010, 8:56 GMT)

they aren't as good as people suggest... even against pakistan who is very very weak due to the non availability of players they didn't really dominate with the bat that much... they would have a good long partnership... just one and the rest would flop... that was the story of all the innings of that series... just that pakistan was worse with no partnerships at all...

Comments have now been closed for this article