July 30, 2013

The ghosts of 1956

Australia have been tentative against Swann's offspin. At Old Trafford, where history's greatest spin performance was delivered, they must watch out for him
  shares 26

Are the ghosts of 1956 gathering to haunt Michael Clarke's men at Old Trafford?

The way the Australian batsmen poked and prodded against Graeme Swann was a reminder of that Test in July 1956 when Jim Laker took a world record 19 for 90 on a dusty turner. Australian batsmen through the years have struggled big time against quality offspinners: England's Laker, Fred Titmus, David Allen, Pat Pocock and John Emburey have all had more than a few days in the sun against Australia; so too South Africa's Hugh Tayfield, India's Erapalli Prasanna, Harbhajan Singh and R Ashwin, New Zealand's John Bracewell, and Lance Gibbs of West Indies.

But it was Laker who caused the most hurt to Australia's batting psyche against offspin. In 1956, the Old Trafford wicket proper was completely devoid of grass - as bare as the gnarled and parched rough that confronted the left-handers against Swann at Lord's the other day. When he saw curator Bert Flack enveloped in a cloud of dust as he swept the wicket with a Harry Potter-type straw broom, old Test champ Bill O'Reilly, arguably as good or a better legspinner than Shane Warne, angrily declared from his prime spot in the press box: "Good god, I'd get 12 wickets on that excuse for a wicket without bothering to remove my coat!"

Traditionally the majority of Australian batsmen have thrived in hitting legspinners through mid-off or cover. That they sometimes leave a gap betwixt bat and pad on those shots is mostly of no matter. But it does matter when the ball dips and darts back in towards the stumps. Attempt a cover drive and leave a gap between bat and pad against Swann and good luck. Chances are his ripping offbreaks, which invariably curve and drop, will turn back through the gate to clean-bowl you.

Doug Walters was a master in playing offspinners, and he came up against the best of them all in Prasanna, whose skill in bowling hard-spun, dipping deliveries that hit the turf and spat at the batsman like a striking brown snake was magical.

Walters came at you with an angled bat, so the more the offspinner turned and bounced the ball, the more likely it was that Walters would meet it right in the middle of his bat. He also read the length brilliantly, either going right back on to his stumps or playing well forward. Against the offspinners he never faltered or misjudged the length.

Prasanna was a wicket-taker and did not fall captive to averages. In 49 Tests he took 189 wickets at 30.38, a pretty high average, given that a lot of his Tests were played on the spin-friendly wickets of the subcontinent. However, weighed against that was the fact that he bowled against players who knew how to counter quality spin bowling. To be able to entice Australia's "corpse in pads", Bill Lawry, down the track for a stumping on his beloved MCG when his score stood at 100 was something akin to a miracle. In that 1967-68 four-Test tour, Prasanna took 25 wickets at 27.44, but it was the way he bowled, the guile and the attacking mindset, that stayed in the memory. Then in India in 1969-70, he took 26 wickets against Australia at 25.84.

Prasanna teamed with Bishan Bedi, a totally different type of slow bowler, a graceful left-arm orthodox spinner who approached the wicket rhythmically, like Fred Astaire gliding across the dance floor. On that Indian tour in 1969-70, Ian Chappell mastered Bedi but fought like hell against Prasanna, whereas Walters found Bedi's deliveries sliding across him from leg to off, a mighty chance to catch the edge of his angled bat. Yet against Pras he found it comparatively easy.

Prasanna was the ultimate artist as an offie. He threw the ball up and you could hear it fizz through the air. Seemingly at will, he could lure you forward or drive you back. Pras had a straight ball, sometimes it was a genuine offbreak that didn't turn, like the one that Swann knocked Chris Rogers over with in the second innings at Lord's, but in the main he concentrated on his stock offbreak. And dip and turn it did.

In WG's coaching manual, he writes of how the ball he called a "Spettigue" often confounded batsmen. WG aimed to bowl it high in the air with such skill that gravity took the high full toss and had it fall squarely on top of the bails

India's offspin duo Harbhajan and Ashwin have made Australia struggle, and Ashwin particularly helped spin out Michael Clarke's men in India's recent 4-0 win on absolute minefields. As Australia fell ingloriously to the Indian spinners, I wondered how they would cope against Swann, who might not be quite as good as Jim Laker was at his zenith, but in 2013 is better than Harbhajan and Ashwin put together.

Interestingly, Muttiah Muralitharan, the Sri Lankan spin magician, struggled against the Australians away, although he always enjoyed bowling to them in Galle, where the ball spun prodigiously.

Swann, who admitted that the high full toss he delivered to trap Chris Rogers lbw at Lord's wasn't exactly the greatest ball he has bowled on the Test stage, will be chuffed to discover that the delivery would have warmed the heart of WG Grace. For in WG's coaching manual, a copy of which Greg Chappell was delighted to find in England back in 1975, he writes of how the ball he called a "Spettigue" often confounded batsmen. WG aimed to bowl it high in the air with such skill that gravity took the high full toss and had it fall squarely on top of the bails.

The Australian batsmen played Swann at Lord's as though he was hurling hand grenades at them. They were tentative, prodding forward in hope more than real conviction. There was hardly anyone looking to rotate the strike. Even Clarke, the best player of spin in the team, got down the track and hit one over mid-on for a stirring four, yet too often he was anchored to the crease, as if to say to all and sundry, "If I go, god help the others."

Then there's Shane Watson. Wherever he bats, Watson is a stand-and-deliver merchant. There is a seeming laziness about his batting, for he waits for a ball to hit for four and ignores chances to hit singles and annoy the bowlers. Watson will drive majestically for the odd boundary, but that is all. It makes life very easy for the England attack. They always seem to have Watson facing: a batsman squarely in their sights. Whether opening or down the list, the batsmen must rotate the strike to break the rhythm of the bowler. On a turning track the best place to play good spin is up the other end. If both batsmen are of like mind, the strike is rotated often and the score ticks over nicely.

Usman Khawaja looked all at sea against Swann at Lord's, but in the second innings he showed backbone and better judgement. Yet he too, as with Steve Smith and Phil Hughes, won't work the singles enough against the spinners. Smith looks comfortable against Swann, but only when he goes on the attack. He has shown poor judgement of length on two occasions, going back to a Swann half-volley to get an lbw at Trent Bridge, then forward for a bat-pad catch at Lord's off a ball that was almost a long hop.

The time has come for the Australians to take the attack to Swann. Trent Bridge's slow pitch and the fact that he had to ease himself back into the fold after an elbow injury made Swann's bowling not quite up to the standard we expect. At Lord's, while he took 5 for 44 and 4 for 78, he still wasn't quite back to his best. That makes him doubly dangerous at Old Trafford. He'll be out to demolish Australia. Can he do a Laker? Well, he's good enough to run through this Australian batting line-up on most surfaces.

Swann, like Laker, has a good sense of humour. After getting 10 for 53 in the second innings at Old Trafford, Laker stood at gully in the fifth Test at The Oval, and when Lock caught Colin McDonald in the leg trap and Australia's score stood at 1 for 3, Laker laughed aloud: "I've got nowt to play for now!"

The good spinners take risks. They are prepared to give a bit to get a bit. Laker wanted wickets. He had an "away ball" that was different to Swann's square spinner, the one that invariably does what he wants, skidding on straight. Laker's away ball sometimes turned if he didn't get it quite right.

I once set the scene. "Okay, Jim. They've six to win, one ball to go, the opposition are nine down and the slogging right-hander is on strike. The away ball is the obvious one to deliver. You bowl it and instead of going slightly away, the ball turns. What happens?"

"We lose."

David Warner, whose Achilles heel was always spin, has improved against this form of attack and he must come back into the side as an opener. That is his natural spot and where he has had most success. Another Australian who should play at Old Trafford is offspinner Nathan Lyon. He needs to concentrate on his stock offbreaks at different paces and deliver them from different points on the crease. Change of pace and subtle changes in angle will help Lyon attack and defend in the same package.

Realistically, unless the Australians go after Swann in a sensible fashion - rotating the strike to break his rhythm and pattern of having men all about the bat - Old Trafford for Swann might well turn out to be a Laker-like wicket harvest.

Ashley Mallett took 132 Tests wickets in 38 Tests for Australia. An author of over 25 books, he has written biographies of Clarrie Grimmett, Doug Walters, Jeff Thomson and Ian Chappell

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • POSTED BY gavbergin on | July 30, 2013, 8:25 GMT

    I believe the delivery mentioned in the article as being written about by W.G. Grace -"For in WG's coaching manual, a copy of which Greg Chappell was delighted to find in England back in 1975, he writes of how the ball he called a "Spettigue" often confounded batsmen. WG aimed to bowl it high in the air with such skill that gravity took the high full toss and had it fall squarely on top of the bails. "-refers to 'Spedogue's Drifter', created by an Arthur Conan Doyle character and referred to in David Frith's wonderful book about perhaps the most famous of all Ashes series, Australia 1932-33, in 'Bodyline Autopsy.

  • POSTED BY on | August 1, 2013, 7:46 GMT

    @Finkelstein, have you not looked up his stats? 144 test wickets in 27 matches at 22.59. 774 First Class wickets in 135 matches at 16.60. Bradman said he was the greatest bowler he ever saw. He was at least 'arguably' as good as Warne.

    (That said, most observers from the era noted that he bowled at something approaching medium pace. Grimmett and Mailey were probably the great 'traditional' leg spinners of the era.)

  • POSTED BY Finkelstein on | August 1, 2013, 1:34 GMT

    "Bill O'Reilly, arguably as good or a better legspinner than Shane Warne"

    Hahahahahaha! You old guys crack me up.

  • POSTED BY Chaffers on | July 31, 2013, 15:33 GMT

    A distinction should be made between fast leg theory, and leg theory. The former being otherwise known as bodyline, though even after the rule change it was still used effectively ( though without the short pitched element) by a number of bowlers including Bedser to slow batsmen down.

    Leg theory, or the leg trap, was very much a spinners prerogative however it caused wails of outrage due to the lack of cover drives being witnessed. Indeed I remember reading a Wisden article advocating either a change in the fielding laws or that leg side runs be counted double.

    Imagine how effective a leg spinner would be if only five fielders were allowed on the off side, you'll often see 7-2 fields for a hard turning leggie. The combination of restrictions makes Chinaman almost impossible to bowl effectively

  • POSTED BY on | July 31, 2013, 12:10 GMT

    @LePom The fielding restriction was already in the 1970 edition of the Laws so it can't have been in response to Lillee and Thompson.

  • POSTED BY LePom on | July 31, 2013, 8:09 GMT

    @ Phillip Felton. l think you are correct. The original law change after the bodyline series was to outlaw the persistent bowling of short pitched deliveries to intimidate the batsman. The leg side rule was much more recent and was either the leg trap reason you describe or was to remedy the fact that Umpires were not applying the intimidation law (it may have been the bowling of Lillee & Thommo that prompted the change).

  • POSTED BY on | July 30, 2013, 22:09 GMT

    Posted by SquareLegs on (July 30, 2013, 14:54 GMT) "@Chaffers I believe you can have 10 fielders on the on-side if you want, but since the 'Bodyline' series law 41 states that you cannot have more than 2 (other than the wicket keeper) behind the popping crease on the leg side." Nothing to do with 'Bodyline' it was introduced much later, it wasn't in the 2nd edition of the 1947 edition of the Laws (it would have been part of Law 44) adopted in 1952. It was in the 4th Edition in 1970 so the earliest it can have been introduced was in the 3rd edition in 1962. My recollection is that it was introduced to remove the boring matches arising from the practice of padding up to spinners bowling to a leg trap.

  • POSTED BY thejesusofcool on | July 30, 2013, 18:08 GMT

    Spot on, Mr Mallett!

    That's one of the enduring faults in your lot's batting-they just don't know how to rotate the strike & therefore possibly upset the bowler's rhythm. This applies equally to their playing of the seamers.

    Additionally, if you've just come in, you get to gauge how so and so's bowling & what the pitch is doing from the bowler's end just as well as facing.

    Now, the big ask, will they see the light any time soon, especially with a tease like Watson opening?

  • POSTED BY Game_Gazer on | July 30, 2013, 17:08 GMT

    Ashley Mallett, what a legendary analyst of techniques & mind-set ! I once read his book on Bowling some 15 years back, was such a master-speak ! Take a bow !

  • POSTED BY 2MikeGattings on | July 30, 2013, 15:53 GMT

    @SquareLegs That was my understanding too -- that the rule was brought in after Bodyline. Anyway I suspect we'll see a bit more of this especially to Clarke, who has generally had the measure of Swann over the years, but flicked Root to leg slip as soon as the tactic was tried at Lord's.

  • POSTED BY gavbergin on | July 30, 2013, 8:25 GMT

    I believe the delivery mentioned in the article as being written about by W.G. Grace -"For in WG's coaching manual, a copy of which Greg Chappell was delighted to find in England back in 1975, he writes of how the ball he called a "Spettigue" often confounded batsmen. WG aimed to bowl it high in the air with such skill that gravity took the high full toss and had it fall squarely on top of the bails. "-refers to 'Spedogue's Drifter', created by an Arthur Conan Doyle character and referred to in David Frith's wonderful book about perhaps the most famous of all Ashes series, Australia 1932-33, in 'Bodyline Autopsy.

  • POSTED BY on | August 1, 2013, 7:46 GMT

    @Finkelstein, have you not looked up his stats? 144 test wickets in 27 matches at 22.59. 774 First Class wickets in 135 matches at 16.60. Bradman said he was the greatest bowler he ever saw. He was at least 'arguably' as good as Warne.

    (That said, most observers from the era noted that he bowled at something approaching medium pace. Grimmett and Mailey were probably the great 'traditional' leg spinners of the era.)

  • POSTED BY Finkelstein on | August 1, 2013, 1:34 GMT

    "Bill O'Reilly, arguably as good or a better legspinner than Shane Warne"

    Hahahahahaha! You old guys crack me up.

  • POSTED BY Chaffers on | July 31, 2013, 15:33 GMT

    A distinction should be made between fast leg theory, and leg theory. The former being otherwise known as bodyline, though even after the rule change it was still used effectively ( though without the short pitched element) by a number of bowlers including Bedser to slow batsmen down.

    Leg theory, or the leg trap, was very much a spinners prerogative however it caused wails of outrage due to the lack of cover drives being witnessed. Indeed I remember reading a Wisden article advocating either a change in the fielding laws or that leg side runs be counted double.

    Imagine how effective a leg spinner would be if only five fielders were allowed on the off side, you'll often see 7-2 fields for a hard turning leggie. The combination of restrictions makes Chinaman almost impossible to bowl effectively

  • POSTED BY on | July 31, 2013, 12:10 GMT

    @LePom The fielding restriction was already in the 1970 edition of the Laws so it can't have been in response to Lillee and Thompson.

  • POSTED BY LePom on | July 31, 2013, 8:09 GMT

    @ Phillip Felton. l think you are correct. The original law change after the bodyline series was to outlaw the persistent bowling of short pitched deliveries to intimidate the batsman. The leg side rule was much more recent and was either the leg trap reason you describe or was to remedy the fact that Umpires were not applying the intimidation law (it may have been the bowling of Lillee & Thommo that prompted the change).

  • POSTED BY on | July 30, 2013, 22:09 GMT

    Posted by SquareLegs on (July 30, 2013, 14:54 GMT) "@Chaffers I believe you can have 10 fielders on the on-side if you want, but since the 'Bodyline' series law 41 states that you cannot have more than 2 (other than the wicket keeper) behind the popping crease on the leg side." Nothing to do with 'Bodyline' it was introduced much later, it wasn't in the 2nd edition of the 1947 edition of the Laws (it would have been part of Law 44) adopted in 1952. It was in the 4th Edition in 1970 so the earliest it can have been introduced was in the 3rd edition in 1962. My recollection is that it was introduced to remove the boring matches arising from the practice of padding up to spinners bowling to a leg trap.

  • POSTED BY thejesusofcool on | July 30, 2013, 18:08 GMT

    Spot on, Mr Mallett!

    That's one of the enduring faults in your lot's batting-they just don't know how to rotate the strike & therefore possibly upset the bowler's rhythm. This applies equally to their playing of the seamers.

    Additionally, if you've just come in, you get to gauge how so and so's bowling & what the pitch is doing from the bowler's end just as well as facing.

    Now, the big ask, will they see the light any time soon, especially with a tease like Watson opening?

  • POSTED BY Game_Gazer on | July 30, 2013, 17:08 GMT

    Ashley Mallett, what a legendary analyst of techniques & mind-set ! I once read his book on Bowling some 15 years back, was such a master-speak ! Take a bow !

  • POSTED BY 2MikeGattings on | July 30, 2013, 15:53 GMT

    @SquareLegs That was my understanding too -- that the rule was brought in after Bodyline. Anyway I suspect we'll see a bit more of this especially to Clarke, who has generally had the measure of Swann over the years, but flicked Root to leg slip as soon as the tactic was tried at Lord's.

  • POSTED BY SquareLegs on | July 30, 2013, 14:54 GMT

    @Chaffers I believe you can have 10 fielders on the on-side if you want, but since the 'Bodyline' series law 41 states that you cannot have more than 2 (other than the wicket keeper) behind the popping crease on the leg side. Perhaps your short square was behind square.

  • POSTED BY Biggus on | July 30, 2013, 14:47 GMT

    @Chaffers:-Actually I think the only limitation to fielders on the leg-side is no more than 2 behind square which was the rule to limit bodyline fields but applies to all bowling, not just to quicks. That's my understanding of the rule. If anyone knows better feel free to correct me but that would limit a spinner to 2 leg slips.

  • POSTED BY Chaffers on | July 30, 2013, 14:11 GMT

    @2MikeGattings As I recall they changed the rules shortly after to limit the number of players you could have on the leg side whilst bowling offspin.

    I came a cropper when asking for 6 men on the legside whilst bowling chinamen, though I can't find a reference to the actual law.

    This was because Laker and others were so destructive with their leg traps, which is basically 2 leg slips, and a short square with the offspinner bowling from around the wicket . Right handers trying to play against it would be trying to play around their front pad and were often either nicking it to the slips or being drawn out of their crease.

    I've yet to find a captain who will let me try it at club cricket....

  • POSTED BY WBoy on | July 30, 2013, 13:01 GMT

    Since it's been raining everywhere in England since the last Test, all this may be confounded by a greentop.

  • POSTED BY on | July 30, 2013, 12:49 GMT

    Andross? They Can however be on the wrong side of the first English INFLICTED Whitewash? I think what that means is that ENGLAND? Have never achieved a whitewash in 5 test Ashes themselves? (Though they've won 5-1 IN Aus' & beaten Aus' out of sight in all 3 tests a couple of times in the 1800's when there WAS only 3 tests in Ashes IIRR?) If & it's still only that England Do manage to gain a whitewash over Aus' in FIVE test matches? That will be a first.........

  • POSTED BY on | July 30, 2013, 12:31 GMT

    "Bill O'Reilly, arguably as good or a better legspinner than Shane Warne.."

    You might well be right. I always get amused when Indians rate Tendulkar as their all time greatest batsman. Have they forgotten gavaskar?

    I've just finished reading Morriss's Operation Ashes...Laker bowled the tourists out in the county match, so the OT test was no fluke

    Watson may be failing as a batsman, but seems a pretty safe bet as a change bowler

  • POSTED BY 2MikeGattings on | July 30, 2013, 11:51 GMT

    Swann rarely goes around the wicket to right-handers. I have wondered whether he could use this tactic more often, especially when there is a lot of turn. From the footage I've seen, Laker got most of his wickets in 1956 this way.

  • POSTED BY on | July 30, 2013, 11:28 GMT

    So, Graeme Swann to get 19+ wickets at Old Trafford. You heard it first from Ashley Mallett...

  • POSTED BY Andross on | July 30, 2013, 10:43 GMT

    Australia won an Ashes whitewash in 2006/7, so they can't be on the wrong side of the first one. And that's just in my memory.

  • POSTED BY Biggus on | July 30, 2013, 10:13 GMT

    @kishorekr:-It's been changed since I posted.

  • POSTED BY sifter132 on | July 30, 2013, 9:31 GMT

    Never let a chance to bash Watson go past. His strike rotation vs the fast men hasn't been good, but that's not relevant in an argument about Swann. He's faced 38 balls from Swann this series for 6 singles, compare that to Rogers (5 x singles1s from 55 balls against Swann), Cowan (0 x 1s from 14 balls), Hughes (9 x 1s from 76 balls), Khawaja (6 x 1s from 66 balls), even Agar (6 x 1s from 83 balls). It's obvious from those numbers that the Aussie left handers have no clue how to get off strike vs Swann and given Swann's glee at bowling to lefties, it's only a matter of time before he gets them out - they are sitting ducks! I don't remember David Warner calmly working Ashwin around in India much either, he's hardly going to be a saviour in this department. My suggestion? These guys should watch the tapes of M.Hussey vs Swann from 2010/11 in Brisbane and Perth. He was aggressive early against Swann, and that opened up the gaps. Used his feet to disrupt the length too.

  • POSTED BY kishorekr on | July 30, 2013, 7:34 GMT

    @Biggus - Photo caption is quite OK. It says Ron Archer was stumped by Evans off Laker. What is wrong with that?

  • POSTED BY on | July 30, 2013, 6:58 GMT

    Strange that Aussies performing badly in India, makes the wickets as mine-fields, and Indians playing badly in Australia, show a lack of skill. Indians had 6 hundreds in the recent series against India and Australia had 1. It wasnt as if the wickets were "win the toss, win the match" types.Australia won all 4 tosses and India won 3/4 games batting last. Generally you dont win tests batting last on spinning minefields, regardless of the target(e.g: Mumbai 2004).Cant it be possible that the wickets were good and as agreed by the author, the aussies are atrocious players of spin??? England beat India on similar or dare I say, worse wickets. It is the Aussie fascination with the ashes that allowed players(present and Former) to use the pitches as an excuse. The fact that you were outplayed by the better team(taking conditions into factor) was conveniently forgotten.Hence today Australia is 2-0 and might end up on the wrong side of the 1st ever ashes white- wash.

  • POSTED BY Romanticstud on | July 30, 2013, 6:18 GMT

    Remember too it is not only Australia that have had problems with Spinners ... South Africa too have over the years failed against Warne ... The Sri-Lankans in Sri Lanka ... Kumble ... Most of the reason is because the batsmen are used to hard bouncy wickets where there are few spinners and the quality of them is sub-standard ... What is needed is a dust bowl in South Africa and Australia, where batsmen can learn to face quality spinners and then maybe the dreaded collapse against them will not happen ... I remember at school the guys used to thrive on the idea of facing a spinner ... because they had more time to hit the ball ... but I also bowled spin at them in the nets and I had a habit of mixing my deliveries so they wouldn't predict what was coming next ... I used to bowl them out often ...

  • POSTED BY skkh on | July 30, 2013, 3:43 GMT

    Rotating strike is a forgotten art for us Australians. None of our batsmen do that any more and in the process the bowler gets on the top. Watson is all power and wants to score in boundaries only. If only he could take a single and go to the other end the bowler will then not be able to plan to trap him in front of the stumps.

  • POSTED BY Biggus on | July 30, 2013, 2:54 GMT

    Caption for the photo is wrong I suspect. I'm pretty sure Godfrey Evans the English keeper wasn't playing for Australia at OT in 1956, and thus couldn't be stumped off Laker. He'd be the one doing the stumping you'd reckon.

  • POSTED BY Biggus on | July 30, 2013, 2:54 GMT

    Caption for the photo is wrong I suspect. I'm pretty sure Godfrey Evans the English keeper wasn't playing for Australia at OT in 1956, and thus couldn't be stumped off Laker. He'd be the one doing the stumping you'd reckon.

  • POSTED BY skkh on | July 30, 2013, 3:43 GMT

    Rotating strike is a forgotten art for us Australians. None of our batsmen do that any more and in the process the bowler gets on the top. Watson is all power and wants to score in boundaries only. If only he could take a single and go to the other end the bowler will then not be able to plan to trap him in front of the stumps.

  • POSTED BY Romanticstud on | July 30, 2013, 6:18 GMT

    Remember too it is not only Australia that have had problems with Spinners ... South Africa too have over the years failed against Warne ... The Sri-Lankans in Sri Lanka ... Kumble ... Most of the reason is because the batsmen are used to hard bouncy wickets where there are few spinners and the quality of them is sub-standard ... What is needed is a dust bowl in South Africa and Australia, where batsmen can learn to face quality spinners and then maybe the dreaded collapse against them will not happen ... I remember at school the guys used to thrive on the idea of facing a spinner ... because they had more time to hit the ball ... but I also bowled spin at them in the nets and I had a habit of mixing my deliveries so they wouldn't predict what was coming next ... I used to bowl them out often ...

  • POSTED BY on | July 30, 2013, 6:58 GMT

    Strange that Aussies performing badly in India, makes the wickets as mine-fields, and Indians playing badly in Australia, show a lack of skill. Indians had 6 hundreds in the recent series against India and Australia had 1. It wasnt as if the wickets were "win the toss, win the match" types.Australia won all 4 tosses and India won 3/4 games batting last. Generally you dont win tests batting last on spinning minefields, regardless of the target(e.g: Mumbai 2004).Cant it be possible that the wickets were good and as agreed by the author, the aussies are atrocious players of spin??? England beat India on similar or dare I say, worse wickets. It is the Aussie fascination with the ashes that allowed players(present and Former) to use the pitches as an excuse. The fact that you were outplayed by the better team(taking conditions into factor) was conveniently forgotten.Hence today Australia is 2-0 and might end up on the wrong side of the 1st ever ashes white- wash.

  • POSTED BY kishorekr on | July 30, 2013, 7:34 GMT

    @Biggus - Photo caption is quite OK. It says Ron Archer was stumped by Evans off Laker. What is wrong with that?

  • POSTED BY sifter132 on | July 30, 2013, 9:31 GMT

    Never let a chance to bash Watson go past. His strike rotation vs the fast men hasn't been good, but that's not relevant in an argument about Swann. He's faced 38 balls from Swann this series for 6 singles, compare that to Rogers (5 x singles1s from 55 balls against Swann), Cowan (0 x 1s from 14 balls), Hughes (9 x 1s from 76 balls), Khawaja (6 x 1s from 66 balls), even Agar (6 x 1s from 83 balls). It's obvious from those numbers that the Aussie left handers have no clue how to get off strike vs Swann and given Swann's glee at bowling to lefties, it's only a matter of time before he gets them out - they are sitting ducks! I don't remember David Warner calmly working Ashwin around in India much either, he's hardly going to be a saviour in this department. My suggestion? These guys should watch the tapes of M.Hussey vs Swann from 2010/11 in Brisbane and Perth. He was aggressive early against Swann, and that opened up the gaps. Used his feet to disrupt the length too.

  • POSTED BY Biggus on | July 30, 2013, 10:13 GMT

    @kishorekr:-It's been changed since I posted.

  • POSTED BY Andross on | July 30, 2013, 10:43 GMT

    Australia won an Ashes whitewash in 2006/7, so they can't be on the wrong side of the first one. And that's just in my memory.

  • POSTED BY on | July 30, 2013, 11:28 GMT

    So, Graeme Swann to get 19+ wickets at Old Trafford. You heard it first from Ashley Mallett...

  • POSTED BY 2MikeGattings on | July 30, 2013, 11:51 GMT

    Swann rarely goes around the wicket to right-handers. I have wondered whether he could use this tactic more often, especially when there is a lot of turn. From the footage I've seen, Laker got most of his wickets in 1956 this way.