Australia v England, 4th ODI, Adelaide January 26, 2011

Trott heroics keep England alive

  shares 94

England 8 for 299 (Trott 102, Prior 67, Hussey 4-21) beat Australia 7 for 278 (Watson 64, Trott 2-31) by 21 runs
Scorecard and ball-by-ball details

Jonathan Trott's calculating century ensured England stayed in the series with a 21-run victory that upset Australia's national holiday in Adelaide. The tourists began the game needing to win and the scenario won't change when they head to Brisbane for Sunday's fifth ODI, but they have been boosted by an end to four consecutive limited-overs losses.

Trott's perfectly timed 102 off 126 balls stood tall on a day that was meant to be a celebration of all things Australia, but the home supporters left unhappy as the series score-line in the seven-game contest settled at 3-1. Trott, bowling his steady medium pace, even managed the valuable breakthroughs of Cameron White (44) and David Hussey (28) to end the pair's rescue act.

England's 8 for 299, which was reduced slightly by effective slow bowling, was more than enough for Australia, especially when the dangerman Shane Watson fell for a bright 64. England's bowlers did not allow the batsmen to gain any rhythm on a sluggish pitch and were able to wait for the locals to make mistakes as they tried to force the pace.

The opener Brad Haddin burned brightly for 20 before chipping Chris Tremlett to cover and Shaun Marsh (1) was caught and bowled by James Anderson (2 for 57). Michael Clarke's run struggles continued when he was bowled on 15 by the frugal Paul Collingwood and the side was 4 for 116 when Watson aimed a big drive and was caught behind off Ajmal Shahzad. Steven Smith managed a personal best of 46 and Brett Lee registered 39 as the game wound down, with the pair seeing the side to 7 for 278.

While Trott's bowling was a bonus, his best work was undoubtedly done with the bat. His century built on Matt Prior's brutal 67 off 58 as the top order maintained a ferocious pace.

Trott backed up his 84 not out in Sydney on Sunday with a much more fluent contribution that drove England towards a formidable total. He unfurled a couple of delightful straight drives, including one off John Hastings to move to 85, and reached his century with a single to midwicket.

He didn't push on after the milestone and played-on to Hussey shortly after raising his bat, walking off with six boundaries and a long ovation. The only major discomfort he experienced before then came on 30 when he found himself at the same end as Prior after his defensive shot rolled on to the base of the stumps. Lee followed through but his wild throw back to the bowler's end was wide and Trott survived.

Collingwood, who launched Lee for six to midwicket in the Powerplay, and Michael Yardy provided some late muscle to ensure the big score. Collingwood passed 5000 ODI runs, the first England batsman to do so, during his run-a-ball 27 while Yardy grabbed an unbeaten 39 off 27. Hussey, the offspinner, was called late, knocking over Collingwood and then dismissing Shahzad in the final over.

Hussey, who sneaked 4 for 21 off four overs, and Smith (3 for 33 off seven) collected career-best figures as they restricted batsmen who had enjoyed the offerings of their faster team-mates. Xavier Doherty also enjoyed the conditions as he gave away 44 from his 10 overs.

Prior and Trott delivered the early pain to the Australians after the visitors won the toss. He and Trott put on 113 at almost a run a ball for the second wicket following the early loss of Andrew Strauss for 8. Prior wasted little time in getting going and his half-century came when he pulled Lee off the front foot for six, with England moving to 1 for 100 after 15 overs.

Smith, the legspinner, picked up Prior in his second over when he cut to point and had more success when Kevin Pietersen (12) chipped to long-on. Two balls later Ian Bell exited without scoring, leaving England stuttering at 4 for 158.

Australia's fast bowlers seemed in trouble from the moment Lee's first over went for 12, with him starting with five wides down the leg-side. Lee finished with 1 for 68 off eight while Bollinger also struggled at the start and finish, giving away 55 in nine. The generosity helped England ruin the hosts' party, but the visitors still require victory in the remaining three games to steal the trophy.

Peter English is the Australasia editor of ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • POSTED BY Meety on | January 28, 2011, 21:51 GMT

    @Geoff Curruthers - I agree re Clarke's captaincy, although I do beleive that Punter is a good ODI captain, I just wished (like many others), he would show more risk in his Test captaincy. I think when it comes to Tests, Punter may be more of a victim of back room politics i.e Nielsen. In the Ashes whilst the Poms bowled well by keeping the ball away from the leg stump 99% of the time (T Cooley take note!), there were plenty of balls particularly by Finn & Broad that were left alone wide of off stump. Leaving balls ahort outside off stump IS NOT the Oz way & I can only think it was a Nielsen strategy. May not of changed any results but I spose you can only dream hey!

  • POSTED BY Meety on | January 28, 2011, 21:46 GMT

    @Okakaboka - no doubt Pup is out of form. My comment is about the venom & the futility of the arguements. The venom cannot be about just his form particularly when White is one of the main "alternatives" put fwd yet his form is not great (albeit better than Clarke). The futility of it all is that 1) Great in theory to get some form in "Shield" but there is nothing doing domestically for another couple of weeks. 2) Clarke is already selected in the WC squad & is current Oz captain & should be supported by the Public - he does a mountain of work in his own tiome with kids etc. 3) Clarke generally has a good record in India (last Tests series wasn't good), & there is reasonable expectation he'll do well 4) He is regarded by most experts to be Oz best player of spin which will be handy given the small matter of the location of the WC! @Okakaboka - I think in all practicalities it is AFTER the W/Cup that his place in ODIs should be scrutinised & after Tests against SL for the Baggy Green!

  • POSTED BY on | January 28, 2011, 18:31 GMT

    After years of putting up with Ponting's hangdog looks, poor field settings, and perceived lack of interest when things aren't going his way, we finally get a captain that shows a bit of enthusiasm and you lot want to get rid of him. As captain Clarke seems to be one of a select few who knows instinctively which reins to pull eg. his introduction of Smith and Hussey on Wednesday. He is a proactive captain whereas his predecessor didn't even have the nous to be reactive. My Border Collie could have captained the sides that Ponting has had in the past to just as many wins, and would have been a damn sight faster around the paddock. Sorry, but I'd rather have Clarke in there as captain averaging 20 than Ponting averaging 50, which given his form this season is highly unlikely anyway.

  • POSTED BY Okakaboka on | January 28, 2011, 13:20 GMT

    @Meety...No, it is NOT interstate rivalry about Clarke. Many of us see the deterioration in his technique, lack of footwork, angled bat and indecisiveness over the last 2 years. He appears to be getting worse and the negative criticism may very well be contributing to it. HE NEEDS A BREAK at Shield level. If he wasn't Captain/vice captain he would have been told to take a break by now. We are going to take him to the world cup with his confidence totally shattered. You might well be right in saying it is too late to drop him as HE IS going to the World Cup whether we like it or not. Somehow the current pattern needs to be broken. Let him miss 1 or 2 games. Finally, I haven't had anyone comment on why White was fielding in the deep in the last match. He is just about our best fieldsman...Why would Clarke/Dopey Nielson do this? The timing of taking the power plays is also dodgy and makes many of us question Clarke's captaincy....Or is it Nielson's call?

  • POSTED BY thebill970 on | January 28, 2011, 12:45 GMT

    Can someone explain to me how Trott keeps getting away with obstructing the field? He constantly looks up at where the return is coming from and deliberately gets in the way of it (making his action willful). He even crossed to the opposite side of the pitch in one game to block an incoming return (also making his action willful). Under Law 37, where the key word is 'willful', his actions are illlegal. A batsman can hold their line while running and if the ball hits him then it is neither here nor there. But if the batsman deliberately changes his line to get in the way of the incoming return then that is obstructing the field. Trott does this continually and he also persists with taking too long to face up. The umpires should be doing something about these things. I also wish the Channel 9 commentators would stop saying a batsman can 'run where he wants' because that is NOT TRUE.

  • POSTED BY KingofRedLions on | January 28, 2011, 10:21 GMT

    I never understand why it matters how someone gets wickets if they get wickets. Why is Steve Smith getting three wickets with "dross" worse than (insert name here) getting one wicket and bowling great? As long as he continues taking wickets, there is no problem.

  • POSTED BY Meety on | January 28, 2011, 9:38 GMT

    @SeaforthA1 - thank you - I was beginning to think I was the only sane person on this site (which obviously would mean I was in fact insane!). I said somewhere else that it must be interstate rivalry or something that is causing the venom directed at the players. I am a White fan - but honestly his current & past record is not very good - yet he is billed as the saviour of all things cricket in some peoples eyes - including being the "secret" captain when we win & the ignored/frustrated genius when Clarke LOSES a match. I do beleive there is plenty of talent though - but they are probably about 2 or 3 years away from amking a genuine claim. Can't beleive D Hussey has been touted as a captain (almost as bad as North being put fwd), he has chronically failed at International level - despite having impecable 1st class credentials. I am liking him more & more as a genuine spin option who can bat @ 7 or 8.

  • POSTED BY Meety on | January 28, 2011, 9:27 GMT

    @phoenixsteve - that is exactly what I think. I am ashamed about how fickle Oz fans are - I remember the 1980s, yeah we joked about being crap - but we gave our full support to the side. Everyone at the moment seems to want to just rip in & sack everyone which cause a much bigger problem then currently is. @landl47 - spot on re: Smith but you are way off the mark re: talent pool. It's huge. Talent is blooming everywhere - the only problem is that unlike anytime in my life time, the examination these young talents are getting is not as strong in the Shield. Have a look at what NSW are doing with their "Youth Policy". They already have about 6 players under or around 21 who have massive International potential. Other states need to follow suit but keep old hands to nuture them. I think any batsmen that has been worked over by Stuey Clark this year will know what Test cricket is about. It will take a year or 2 to get the balance right, hopefully Punter & Pup can pull their fingers out!

  • POSTED BY _Australian_ on | January 28, 2011, 7:04 GMT

    @ Dismayed. I am not kidding! To save me typing it out read @Piyush_Advani comments.He states exactly what I would in my defence. All the replacement batsmen you mentioned have either failed at the top level, inexperienced or never played in the sub-continent. To go in to the WC with an inexperienced side and possibly new captain (if Ponting not fit) is not smart. If possible I would happily wager that Clarke wont get dropped before the WC and will get a score before going to the WC.

  • POSTED BY phoenixsteve on | January 28, 2011, 5:57 GMT

    I'm an England fan and one who knows that EVENTUALLY Michael Clark (and later Ricky Ponting) will come good and somebody will suffer! I just hope it's later rather than sooner and that England aren't at the sharp end! Aussie fans seem so fickle and it's amazing they can't remember how good MC was/is/will be? You'll see, captain Clark has a biggie coming....... Promise! COME ON ENGLAND!!!

  • POSTED BY Meety on | January 28, 2011, 21:51 GMT

    @Geoff Curruthers - I agree re Clarke's captaincy, although I do beleive that Punter is a good ODI captain, I just wished (like many others), he would show more risk in his Test captaincy. I think when it comes to Tests, Punter may be more of a victim of back room politics i.e Nielsen. In the Ashes whilst the Poms bowled well by keeping the ball away from the leg stump 99% of the time (T Cooley take note!), there were plenty of balls particularly by Finn & Broad that were left alone wide of off stump. Leaving balls ahort outside off stump IS NOT the Oz way & I can only think it was a Nielsen strategy. May not of changed any results but I spose you can only dream hey!

  • POSTED BY Meety on | January 28, 2011, 21:46 GMT

    @Okakaboka - no doubt Pup is out of form. My comment is about the venom & the futility of the arguements. The venom cannot be about just his form particularly when White is one of the main "alternatives" put fwd yet his form is not great (albeit better than Clarke). The futility of it all is that 1) Great in theory to get some form in "Shield" but there is nothing doing domestically for another couple of weeks. 2) Clarke is already selected in the WC squad & is current Oz captain & should be supported by the Public - he does a mountain of work in his own tiome with kids etc. 3) Clarke generally has a good record in India (last Tests series wasn't good), & there is reasonable expectation he'll do well 4) He is regarded by most experts to be Oz best player of spin which will be handy given the small matter of the location of the WC! @Okakaboka - I think in all practicalities it is AFTER the W/Cup that his place in ODIs should be scrutinised & after Tests against SL for the Baggy Green!

  • POSTED BY on | January 28, 2011, 18:31 GMT

    After years of putting up with Ponting's hangdog looks, poor field settings, and perceived lack of interest when things aren't going his way, we finally get a captain that shows a bit of enthusiasm and you lot want to get rid of him. As captain Clarke seems to be one of a select few who knows instinctively which reins to pull eg. his introduction of Smith and Hussey on Wednesday. He is a proactive captain whereas his predecessor didn't even have the nous to be reactive. My Border Collie could have captained the sides that Ponting has had in the past to just as many wins, and would have been a damn sight faster around the paddock. Sorry, but I'd rather have Clarke in there as captain averaging 20 than Ponting averaging 50, which given his form this season is highly unlikely anyway.

  • POSTED BY Okakaboka on | January 28, 2011, 13:20 GMT

    @Meety...No, it is NOT interstate rivalry about Clarke. Many of us see the deterioration in his technique, lack of footwork, angled bat and indecisiveness over the last 2 years. He appears to be getting worse and the negative criticism may very well be contributing to it. HE NEEDS A BREAK at Shield level. If he wasn't Captain/vice captain he would have been told to take a break by now. We are going to take him to the world cup with his confidence totally shattered. You might well be right in saying it is too late to drop him as HE IS going to the World Cup whether we like it or not. Somehow the current pattern needs to be broken. Let him miss 1 or 2 games. Finally, I haven't had anyone comment on why White was fielding in the deep in the last match. He is just about our best fieldsman...Why would Clarke/Dopey Nielson do this? The timing of taking the power plays is also dodgy and makes many of us question Clarke's captaincy....Or is it Nielson's call?

  • POSTED BY thebill970 on | January 28, 2011, 12:45 GMT

    Can someone explain to me how Trott keeps getting away with obstructing the field? He constantly looks up at where the return is coming from and deliberately gets in the way of it (making his action willful). He even crossed to the opposite side of the pitch in one game to block an incoming return (also making his action willful). Under Law 37, where the key word is 'willful', his actions are illlegal. A batsman can hold their line while running and if the ball hits him then it is neither here nor there. But if the batsman deliberately changes his line to get in the way of the incoming return then that is obstructing the field. Trott does this continually and he also persists with taking too long to face up. The umpires should be doing something about these things. I also wish the Channel 9 commentators would stop saying a batsman can 'run where he wants' because that is NOT TRUE.

  • POSTED BY KingofRedLions on | January 28, 2011, 10:21 GMT

    I never understand why it matters how someone gets wickets if they get wickets. Why is Steve Smith getting three wickets with "dross" worse than (insert name here) getting one wicket and bowling great? As long as he continues taking wickets, there is no problem.

  • POSTED BY Meety on | January 28, 2011, 9:38 GMT

    @SeaforthA1 - thank you - I was beginning to think I was the only sane person on this site (which obviously would mean I was in fact insane!). I said somewhere else that it must be interstate rivalry or something that is causing the venom directed at the players. I am a White fan - but honestly his current & past record is not very good - yet he is billed as the saviour of all things cricket in some peoples eyes - including being the "secret" captain when we win & the ignored/frustrated genius when Clarke LOSES a match. I do beleive there is plenty of talent though - but they are probably about 2 or 3 years away from amking a genuine claim. Can't beleive D Hussey has been touted as a captain (almost as bad as North being put fwd), he has chronically failed at International level - despite having impecable 1st class credentials. I am liking him more & more as a genuine spin option who can bat @ 7 or 8.

  • POSTED BY Meety on | January 28, 2011, 9:27 GMT

    @phoenixsteve - that is exactly what I think. I am ashamed about how fickle Oz fans are - I remember the 1980s, yeah we joked about being crap - but we gave our full support to the side. Everyone at the moment seems to want to just rip in & sack everyone which cause a much bigger problem then currently is. @landl47 - spot on re: Smith but you are way off the mark re: talent pool. It's huge. Talent is blooming everywhere - the only problem is that unlike anytime in my life time, the examination these young talents are getting is not as strong in the Shield. Have a look at what NSW are doing with their "Youth Policy". They already have about 6 players under or around 21 who have massive International potential. Other states need to follow suit but keep old hands to nuture them. I think any batsmen that has been worked over by Stuey Clark this year will know what Test cricket is about. It will take a year or 2 to get the balance right, hopefully Punter & Pup can pull their fingers out!

  • POSTED BY _Australian_ on | January 28, 2011, 7:04 GMT

    @ Dismayed. I am not kidding! To save me typing it out read @Piyush_Advani comments.He states exactly what I would in my defence. All the replacement batsmen you mentioned have either failed at the top level, inexperienced or never played in the sub-continent. To go in to the WC with an inexperienced side and possibly new captain (if Ponting not fit) is not smart. If possible I would happily wager that Clarke wont get dropped before the WC and will get a score before going to the WC.

  • POSTED BY phoenixsteve on | January 28, 2011, 5:57 GMT

    I'm an England fan and one who knows that EVENTUALLY Michael Clark (and later Ricky Ponting) will come good and somebody will suffer! I just hope it's later rather than sooner and that England aren't at the sharp end! Aussie fans seem so fickle and it's amazing they can't remember how good MC was/is/will be? You'll see, captain Clark has a biggie coming....... Promise! COME ON ENGLAND!!!

  • POSTED BY landl47 on | January 28, 2011, 3:09 GMT

    @5wombats: thanks for the compliment, though I don't think my opinions are any better than anyone else's! I understand what you're saying about Smith and I think in the long term that putting him in the international side at this early stage of his career might hinder his development. As a batsman he has obvious technical flaws which will be found out against top-quality bowling, but he has a great eye and hits the ball hard. As a bowler I think he has one of the best leg-spin actions around and a good temperament. What he needs to do is develop a really sharp-turning leg-break; that's what Warne did and significantly it was Benaud who gave him that advice. It's going to take several years of hard work to do it, which is why I think he'd be better off out of the side at the moment. Still, I think he's worth his place now, which makes it hard to drop him. Contrary to what some here are saying, Aus doesn't have a great pool of young talent and he's one of the few bright lights.

  • POSTED BY Iceborn999 on | January 28, 2011, 1:27 GMT

    Michael Clarke has got to go in my opinion. Is it fair that a guy can play the way he has been and still be supported by the selectors???.

  • POSTED BY Meety on | January 27, 2011, 23:57 GMT

    @ leomc - I'm sure alot of Shield batsmen have learned alot after being worked over by Stuey Clark. A few years ago there was Kaspa & Bichel & Dizzy & Jo ANgel before that players who'd peaked but played a few more years domestically. A lot of players once they retire Internationally don't play 1st class as they think they are hindering some youngster coming through. I think the other problem domestically is that the spread of talent is clustered. For all those NSW bashers out there have a look at their pace bowling ranks; Clark, Bollinger, Lee (Short formats), Bracken (unsure of status), Starc, Hazlewood, Copeland, Cameron & 2 teenagers Abbot & Cummins (17yrs old & can bowl 145km!). How many other states are giving their youngsters a real crack - Sth Aust are using a lot of ex-NSW players so to Tassie. QLD have some great bowling prospects (Cutting in particular), but apart from Lynn no real batsmen, I personally think that Hartley is the best keeper in the land though. Patience all.

  • POSTED BY Meety on | January 27, 2011, 23:46 GMT

    @ pj3000 /Steve Jones - I would of had Christian in the WC squad - but I think his poor bowling in the PMs XI spooked the selectors. Hastings did OK in India (1game), that was played last yr - maybe that influenced their decision. @ 5wombats - re: Smith - the thing with Smith was domestically he has produced the goods, he has out bowled Hauritz in games they have played together, & at one point had a 1st class average around 60 which TRADITIONALLY meant a fair bit. Results/stats in Oz domestic cricket is currently not translating the way they used to & so Smith hasn't worked in Tests (YET), but I think he is very good & worth a spot in a starting XI in the short formats. I would say that he has more control than Brad Hogg minus the variation, & a better batsmen (Hogg was very handy). @ leomc - the biggest problem in Shield cricket is that not many of the old International Warhorses don't play a year or two before retiring completely, particularly bowlers.

  • POSTED BY Wozza-CY on | January 27, 2011, 23:40 GMT

    pj3000- agreed we were out-thought all summer and have been for some time. Oz seem to be doing the same thing all the time and not opening up to other possibilities. These guys are professional cricketers, why can't they work on innovation in what they do instead of the same thing all the time? I also agree with many posts here that say Clarke won't be dropped. So we need to get a little more imaginative. Maybe he could open the innings like he used to but in a hitting/sacrificial wicket kind of way. If he goes cheap, nothing new, if he beats the infield for a quick 30 then job done. Maybe a better solution is to play him as a left hand spinning all rounder. Doherty misses out & depending on conditions you bring in Ferguson for an extra bat or Christian for an extra seamer. Bat Clarke at 6 or 7 & let Marsh, Watson, White, Hussey, Haddin have some fun. If we're in trouble, then he can play a slow innnings to bat the overs. If he fields well, bowls 5-6 ovrs, gets 20 not he's contributin

  • POSTED BY pj3000 on | January 27, 2011, 21:48 GMT

    Wozza-CY - it is frightening, isn't it, that 'mugs like us' seem to be working out better plans than the team management. I think Peter Roebuck - as usual - hit the nail on the head in saying that England completely out-thought us this Summer. Any thoughts on whether Michael Clarke's dramatic decline could be mainly due to the fact that the English have just worked him so thoroughly well? (Clarke did score a one-day ton against India in October, and a 50 against Sri Lanka in November).

    Stevejones - the John Hastings selection over Dan Christian is an interesting one. As I understand it, they rate Hastings as a bowling allrounder and Dan Christian as a batting allrounder. No disrespect to Hastings, but from what I've seen of his bowling, I don't think we'd lose a lot by bowling Christian. Plus, Christian is one of those guys who can win/turn a game off his own bat. Watson aside, we don't appear flush with players of that calibre at the moment.

  • POSTED BY 5wombats on | January 27, 2011, 20:09 GMT

    @landl47 - I ALWAYS respect your opinion. A lot of people here do. Regarding Smith - You are right that 21 is way young. But what I see at the moment I don't like; Smith is a graceless slogger in ODI - which - as you say can be effective. His bowling is frankly - poor - but, again leggies do take time and he is no worse than anyone else in the Aus bowling line up. I suppose you are right in that Aus has to play youth in order to correct the imbalances of the past 10 years. But quite frankly - I see it as a sign of desperation that someone of the "calibre" of Smith is being thrown in by Australia to ODI's - let alone Tests. He is at least 5 years off being a Test player, and on current showing a year or 2 away in ODI's. Is this Australia's spin allrounder future? Is there really no-one better? Meanwhile England's 21-25 year olds continue to flourish. COMPLETELY agree that Rashid is real quality and will be excellent for England.

  • POSTED BY landl47 on | January 27, 2011, 18:49 GMT

    @Dismayed and Something_Witty: I'm a Smith fan. He's a useful#7 and his bowling can get wickets. However, he's only 21 and for a legspin bowler that's very young. Adil Rashid played for England at 21, was sent down to get more experience and is now beginning to look like a class player. Smith's going to have games when he goes round the park, as the Australia A game against England showed. I think Clarke's used him very sensibly in the ODIs up to now- he's contributed without being expected to be the main man. Just don't expect too much of him. Look, if Richie Benaud says he's the real thing, chances are, he is.

  • POSTED BY leomc on | January 27, 2011, 16:31 GMT

    @Okakaboka - first I am not a fan of M Clarke. IMHO he is overrated and is not Cap'nc material. I do agree Shield Cricket has talent but, consider these qns -

    1. Is there anybody forcing their selection like in the older days? Is there anyone who gives you the confidence that he can just step into an international game and make that extra step up in performance? 2. What is the overall experience of the team compared to the earlier teams? Can the rest of the team, the so-called seniors soak up the pressure from the debutant. For that matter how many level headed exp consistent performers r thr?

    3. The biggest qn - With the world cup in sight, with two experienced & consistent players doubtful due to injury, is it advisable to drop another experienced guy?

    What Clark has received is an extn of life till WC ends(if Hussey and Ponting r fit, he may not start the XI), due to the WC circumstances surrounding a weaker team (its a funny cause Clarkes' presence makes the team weaker :) )

  • POSTED BY jk.jeetukakwani on | January 27, 2011, 16:00 GMT

    well played england. what a lucky charm jimmy anderson is for this team.there was clearly a spring in their attack in this match which they were badly missing in last 3 matches.i think adding swann in this team in place of bell or morgan will give them a perfect combo for starting line up in world cup. they r genuinely hot favourites of this world cup.they have a superb allround team ,a decent captain and above all self belief to win world cup for the first time. the only factor may go against them is dat they will be so tierd going in this world cup. they have been continuosaly playing tough cricket since 3 months and still 3 more odis are remaining of this tour.this is too much cricket. this series could have been of 3 or 5 matches..anyway looking forward to the final result of this series n rocking world cup.best of luck to english team..

  • POSTED BY Piyush_Advani on | January 27, 2011, 14:58 GMT

    Clarke's dip in form is a result of a back problem he suffered just days before the Ashes.Before the Ashes,Clarke actually was Australia's form batsman.In 2010,he scored three test centuries,a one day hundred against India(in a losing cause), was stranded on 99 against England in July,and performed well in the one-dayers against Srilanka,scoring 102 runs at 51 in the series.So please,don't blame Clarke for his latest setback.He will recover,and will recover well.What Aus really need is an extra batsman,so get rid of Doherty and bring in Ferguson.

  • POSTED BY 5wombats on | January 27, 2011, 14:53 GMT

    @Dismayed; Re S.Smith - for "flight, spin,and dip" read; DROSS. Getting wickets bowling long-hops? "batting not technically correct"!!! Give me a break! If Smith is what the future of Australian cricket looks like..... well...phew! The wombats will never want to watch it. @hyclass; your comments remain High Class.

  • POSTED BY Okakaboka on | January 27, 2011, 13:00 GMT

    Hey, the English side aren't too smart! A few of you have observed they haven't got excited when they have got Clarke out. If I was fielding, I would deliberately drop the catch to keep him in. The longer he is at the wicket, the slower the Aussie run rate, and the more confused and out of sorts will be the batsman that follow. Soon, Clarke will make a fifty (from 120 balls) and will have been dropped 5 - 6 times accidentally on purpose.

  • POSTED BY stevejone on | January 27, 2011, 12:06 GMT

    Continued horrible, foolish and average selections are the main reasons why Australia are looking an average side.If Clarke had been dropped months ago due to his poor form, he could have gone and rectified all his flaws in the domestic circuit.Now that time has passed and due to the selectors, Clarke cannot be dropped either as it is too close to the world cup.The other foolish selection is that of allrounder John Hastings.He seems to be an average bowler with no pace whatsoever and his batting was exposed today when he got out to a short ball without any idea where the ball was.If this is what the selectors have on offer then nobody can hep the OZ.Such fine allrounders like Dan Christian,McDonald and James Hopes have been overlooked.In fact Hopes was dropped without any reason.Everybody forgets that even though the Aussies have been poor in Tests, they have been the No.1 team in onedayers and Hopes was one of the star players during that phase.Why would one change a winning side?

  • POSTED BY nickythetoon on | January 27, 2011, 10:35 GMT

    As an England fan I'm glad Clarke is still in the team as he is one batsman guaranteed not to get a score so badly has he played this winter.It's a bit like Collingwood in the England team,it looks alot better without him in the line-up but,unlike Clarke,he is as least a very useful one day bowler.Obviously I don't know the domestic aussie game at all but I'm confident there is plenty of talent that justs needs a chance and a run of games to prove they can play international cricket.Glad to see Smith still in the side as he is bobbins too.

  • POSTED BY KingofRedLions on | January 27, 2011, 10:20 GMT

    Tell you what, if Cricinfo had existed during Mark Taylor's run of bad form, or, even better, Greg Chappell's run of ducks, this section would be hilarious.

  • POSTED BY hyclass on | January 27, 2011, 10:12 GMT

    The hallmark of all the great teams is the level of competition for places in the side. Everyone wants to be part of high quality results and play against the best to test themselves.This lifts the standards to new levels. Its been years since ive seen this in the australian team.The theory of keeping the team together,regardless of results is entirely responsible for the mess we see in australia today.It is without doubt, the worst possible policy.It means that noone is accountable-ever!How long will players keep performing at their best at state and test level when selections arent based on performance.Micheal Clarke is among many fine players whose motivation has been removed.Like Ponting,Hussey, North,Johnson and Hilfenhaus before him, he is guaranteed a place without performing.Where are the free passes for Hodge, Hughes, Hauritz, D.Hussey,Rogers,Copeland and O'Keefe? Ironically,the more professional the sport has become, the less sense the coaching, selction and admin.have made.

  • POSTED BY Something_Witty on | January 27, 2011, 9:29 GMT

    @ Dismayed, that's the most sensible comment I've seen in a long time. Well said.

  • POSTED BY Dismayed on | January 27, 2011, 8:33 GMT

    Seaforth are you kidding? Clarkes form has been tapering off for some time. There are numerous guys in domestic cricket who can come in. Khawaja,Finch,Baily,Ferguson, Hodge, We have captains in waiting in C.White and D. Hussey. The side and Clarke will be better served if he is given a "rest" back in domestic cricket to try and find some form. He was one of the better players of spin but his feet have not moved for some time now and the 17 yr old kid was right he has been reaching for the ball for 3 years.

  • POSTED BY Okakaboka on | January 27, 2011, 8:08 GMT

    @leomc...That's the excuse to keep Clarke by all the Clarke fans out there...The bench is bare. NO.....it isn't. I don't think there is one batsman playing Shield Cricket (except Marcus North) who wouldn't perform better than Clarke. To name a few: Finch, Khawaja , Hodge, Klinger, Paine, Ima thumper, etc. About Clarke's failure....just how long a time frame do you want???

  • POSTED BY Aussasinator on | January 27, 2011, 7:54 GMT

    Cameron White as ODI captain also would be good for the Oz. But the Australians, of late, are known for delaying decisions atrociously. Ponting's absence has lifted this team considerably and brought about zest in their performance, with focus on winning. A decision needs to be taken on Clarke. He's too young to call it a day but a short rest would do him good since he's a class player.

  • POSTED BY Dismayed on | January 27, 2011, 7:22 GMT

    I cant believe people are still trying to detract from S.Smith's game. He beat the batsmen with flight, spin,and dip. You guys need glasses. He batted as well as anyone last night and was there to the end. Sure he is not technically correct but has showed good maturity recently. Give the kid a break. Get rid of Clarke and so called Coach.

  • POSTED BY _Australian_ on | January 27, 2011, 7:10 GMT

    All this Clarke bashing reminds me of what was happening with M. Hussey only a few months back. It's not like Clarke can't bat at all. He is just going through a drop in form like all players do. He will come good and his excellent play of spin will be needed in WC. All of you with little faith and patience I ask who would you replace him with? There is hardly a heap of talent knocking on the door!

  • POSTED BY longlivepakistan on | January 27, 2011, 5:03 GMT

    inzi,ganguli,sehwag these three players saw so much down in their career and look like their career are finshed but they come back stronly and one thing sure their countries also support him in dificult time but it's not hapning with clarke he serve aus lot and always played seriously and want to do something for australia so if he now not inform than support him,the kind of cricketr he is hope he make runz soon......

  • POSTED BY Wozza-CY on | January 27, 2011, 4:31 GMT

    pj3000 & sosbo.. good pick ups, the same plan could be used for Peitersen as well. If mugs like us can see that, than why can the hords of backroom staff & analysts pick that up? Einsteins definition of madness was to do the same thing over & over again & expect a different result. The current ozi set up is then officially mad! If the ball doesn't swing for Bolly, lee etc, what do they do? keep bowling the same? Not a cutter or slower ball in sight. Maybe we're just playing with the best guys who are available? We wonder where the next generation are coming from? If through injury or rep duty siddle, mckay, mcdonald & J.Pattinson can't play (looking likely)Victoria may field a bowling attack of Nannes 34, Wright 35, Harwood 36, McGain 38 & D.Pattinson 31 in a shield final. This attack will have an avge age of 35 years. No wonder our young guys aren't getting big game experience & we have no innovation in our attack. Batsman like Fegurson, Finch & Christian aren't getting blooded either

  • POSTED BY KingofRedLions on | January 27, 2011, 3:26 GMT

    I'm going to repeat my call for a Cricinfo forum.

  • POSTED BY leomc on | January 27, 2011, 3:20 GMT

    @RohanBala, isn't it pretty obvious why Clarke is not dropped while lot of others where pushed out historically. Back then, australian Bench was bristling with talented cricketers who had good first class exp and ready to be pushed into the internationals(most of them had fairly ok int experience too due to player rotation.). But now, the bench looks pretty threadbare... the overall experience in the team is lightweight - proven performers who can soak the pressure are very few. So obviously Aus cannot drop a proven performer like Clarke(u may argue as much that he is overrated, not in form etc. But the fact remains that he has a good past record.). U can argue selection policy should take the same yardstick for everyone. But it may not be the case when u consider a longer timeframe. There are times when it may be more sensible to stick with ppl like clarke even when they r not performing up to the mark for a longish period.

  • POSTED BY Okakaboka on | January 27, 2011, 3:06 GMT

    @rohanbala....Very good question which I can probably answer. Clarke has endorsements...and is therefore linked to sponsorship. He is Cricket Australia's little pin up boy. It isn't fair!......There are rules for some and not others. I have observed this for many years. I have made an interesting observation in 2 posts which haven't been posted relating to Clarke's captaincy last night. Cam White was made field on the ropes for most of the English innings......Why??? White theatens Clarke for the Captaincy and we ALL know the players have more respect for White than Clarke. White's relegation to the boundary line maybe can be linked to the massive drop in the way the team was managed last night....whereas during the previous match White was talking to the bowlers ALL the time. Come on Moderators...this is a fair observation. Nielson is incompetent and needs to go as well...ie..the use of Power Plays. This is Nielson's and Clarke's call.

  • POSTED BY rohanbala on | January 27, 2011, 2:05 GMT

    Steve Waugh, Mark Waugh, Ian Healy, Adam Gilchrist, Mathew Hayden and may be a couple of others (whose names I do not remember right now) are those who were literally hounded into retirement despite showing excellent results, while the likes of the "ever reliable" Michael Bevan and "Dizzy" Jason Gilliespie were dumped unceremoniously by the Australian selectors. Why is it the same yardstick not being followed now for Michael Clarke?

  • POSTED BY mariofan97 on | January 27, 2011, 2:03 GMT

    5 steps for Pup to take...

    1. Ask the selectors to drop him for a game or two 2. During that time, make him play state cricket 3. Bring him back for game 7 ( when Mitch got dropped for the Adelaide Test, he did well in Perth.

  • POSTED BY ollie99 on | January 27, 2011, 1:59 GMT

    It might have been acceptable to carry a captain when the team was winning everything (eg, Tubby), but Australia cannot afford to carry Clarke in his ongoing dismal form. If Clarke stays and doesn't perform at the world cup (can't see how he can suddenly become a productive batsman in 3 weeks) then selectors must cop the blame.

  • POSTED BY rohanbala on | January 27, 2011, 1:49 GMT

    @grg525.. The England players can reserve their celebratory jump for other players (Doug Bollinger etc) than Michael Clarke because they know his stay at the crease will be only for a brief spell of time. Sad that the Australian selectors still persist with their captain who does not know how to utilize the bowling or batting powerplay.

  • POSTED BY Cleon on | January 27, 2011, 1:36 GMT

    if clarke really is a team player and his best interest is australia , he would drop himself from the team and WC squad. Clarke, Michael, Pups..... ;-( please dont play anymore.

  • POSTED BY sosbo on | January 27, 2011, 1:10 GMT

    Memo to bowlers in this series and the world cup - Outside off stump by at least 5 inches and Trott will not make any runs. Seriously this guy can't play and yet he keeps peeling off runs. I can only imagine what McGrath would do to this guy (probably 2 -3 outside off would be enough).

  • POSTED BY landl47 on | January 27, 2011, 1:07 GMT

    I like the look of the England side a lot more with Colly at 7 and Anderson opening the bowling. Scoring nearly 300 with Strauss, Pietersen and Bell not contributing is a good effort. @Hatsforbats: no, Pietersen wasn't a good tactician. Between 2006 (when they made Flintoff captain) and 2009 (when Strauss finally took over from Pietersen) the England selectors seemed to be under the delusion that a player with no captaincy experience and whose skills were mainly natural ability would make a good captain. They thought the same thing when they made Botham captain 30 years ago, and everyone who was around then knows what a disaster that was (it still gives me a chuckle to hear him talking strategy on TV- he gets it wrong every time). Fortunately they finally came to their senses and made Strauss captain and the rest , including two Ashes wins, is history. Even Pietersen admits it!

  • POSTED BY brucee41 on | January 27, 2011, 1:06 GMT

    Brett Lee a 'has been' ? well for that to happen then you have to have been good in the past and he never was, he got wickets off the coat tails of Mcgrath and Warne and rarely took any of the first 5 wickes, most coming from the tailenders. And he still does not have the common sense to picth the ball up, he still likes digging them in short and seeing them sail over the fence and then has the hide to have a go at the batsman. Michael Clarke - if you can't hold your place in the team as a batter or bowler you don't deserve to be there, are the selectors going to give Clarke as much rope as they wasted on Marcus North who still hasn't hit any runs since being dropped. Clarke is out of form - DROP HIM !!

  • POSTED BY pj3000 on | January 27, 2011, 0:30 GMT

    England clearly has more brains than Australia off the park. Notice how quickly they formulated a successful bowling plan to Shaun Marsh after his Hobart ton...yet Australia's had all summer to work out that perhaps the best way to nullify Trott is to hammer away with left arm over the wicket bowling full and wide of off stump with catchers behind point...yet we continue to bowl lines that let him get inside the ball and work it to the on side all day long.

    (Dirk Nannes would be doing a nice job of this if picked. I don't trust Mitch Johnson or even Doug Bollinger to maintain the rage consistently.)

    As a side note, I think it show's Shane Watson's class that although England have got their bowling plans against him, he's still finding ways to put up decent scores more often than not.

  • POSTED BY HatsforBats on | January 27, 2011, 0:25 GMT

    Aus lost when Lee & Bollinger bowled the powerplay rather than Huss & Smith, the 2 bowlers who had taken the wickets and gone for the least runs. Sadly for Pup this was the worst decision he's made for the series and it cost Aus the game. It was a good innings by Trott, and again, just what Eng needed, I can't beleive people are giving this guy stick. Without his innings Aus would've chased 220 quite easily. No one's ever accused KP of being the most cerebral batsmen but he took himself to a new level of idiocy last night (almost as bad as the sweep at Cardiff), I can't believe he was the captain of Eng! Can anyone say if he was any good (tactically etc.)?

  • POSTED BY braindead_rocker on | January 27, 2011, 0:22 GMT

    England just are tired and burnt out after weeks of matches..I am sure they will win the next 3 matches.

  • POSTED BY Cleon on | January 26, 2011, 23:54 GMT

    Australia's top 4 ways of losing the world cup :-4 . Michael Clarke selection in the Squad. .................. check :-3 . Michael Clarke selection in the palying eleven. :-2, Michael Clarke batting higher than 11, :- 1. Michael Clarke as Captain

  • POSTED BY schmiddy on | January 26, 2011, 23:27 GMT

    Steve Smith is a slogger pure and simple with horrible technique. I may be wrong, but it seems he bats best when the cause is lost and never delivers under pressure. I agree that we can't keep saying "sack Clarke" but honestly I can't see how he is going to miraculously pull himself out of this hole in time for the WC. So we just have to live with the fact there is a guaranteed passenger in the batting lineup? Perhaps he should be pushed even further down the order? Or don't play him every game? Please do something to help him out if he cannot be dropped.

  • POSTED BY grg525 on | January 26, 2011, 23:22 GMT

    The most telling point about Clarke's batting is how underwhelmed England are when they get him out. I haven't seen a leap in the air high 5 in his last 3 dismissals.....

  • POSTED BY on | January 26, 2011, 23:05 GMT

    Terrible decision by Clarke to take Smith and Hussey off at the 39 over mark. Bollinger & Lee got carted and let England of the hook. A strange decision indeed,particularly when Smith had the figures of 3/25 odd, and Hussey 2/3 off 2 overs. This is just one more instance of Clarke's inability to captain Australian sides effectively. Before it is to late, appoint Cameron White. If we drop Clarke, Haddin can go down the order, and into the side can come Finch or Warner for some fire power at the top of the innings.

  • POSTED BY on | January 26, 2011, 21:46 GMT

    Well i dont understand the plans australia have. Is this Teflon Tim that has the plans set out and the batsman out on the field have to stick to his plan. I mean why did white and hussey not take the batting powerplay when they had their eye in. They needed 7.5 maybe 8 an over at that stage and hussey hits one down mid off's throat. They needed to take the powerplay then if they wanted any chance of victory. Not leave it for the bowlers. Unbelievable. Clarke, Teflon Tim and the selectors r australia's biggest problems right now.

  • POSTED BY Cleon on | January 26, 2011, 21:36 GMT

    australia lost this match in at the start of the eleventh over when michael clarke called for the bowling powerplay when england batsmen were motoring along at knots. that powerplay should never have been taken at that point. what should have been done is to try and draw the run-rate down and put some pressure on the batsmen not to keep the field in when they were just going over and through the close-in fielders that to me made no sence. not something i think steve waugh woul have done. MICHAEL MUST GO !!!!

  • POSTED BY karl43 on | January 26, 2011, 21:27 GMT

    Well done England, I really thought we would lose 7-0 as Australia have been gaining in confidence since the 2nd T20 victory but we have avoided the whitewash although I still think aus will win either 6-1 or 5-2, I still can't see this being a contest after sunday because aus are a superior one day unit but today's win will give england a confidence boost if nothing else, I notice Ian Botham still thinks we will win 4-3 but somehow i don't think that will happen, glad to see Jimmy Anderson back and he's playing like he never went away although he was a bit expensive in the closing overs.

  • POSTED BY leggetinoz on | January 26, 2011, 21:16 GMT

    As an aussie i am getting a bit sick of all the other Aussies looking to try and sack someone. This has been going on for a long long time and it is beginning to get a bit tedious. In the past summer we have almost asked for a full cricket side to be punted from the national team. How about we just support the boys and get behind them. Rather than come on cric info and say they should all be sacked. Clarke is a good example. He will come good and the sooner everyone stops wanting him to score at a strike rate similar to a watson than the sooner he will get back in form. People wanted him to be a power player and then say he should be dropped to fix his technique as he is hitting too many balls in the air or trying to smash a ball rather than block it. I am picking him to be a big player in the WC especially if the press and fans let him just focus on playing HIS best cricket not what the fans want.

  • POSTED BY PlayingItStraight on | January 26, 2011, 20:59 GMT

    There's a lot of people having a crack at Clarke for his batting (most of it deserved), however the reality is he will be playing right through this series and the WC, so from Australia's point of view let's hope he finds some form. Another big concern, which for some reason seems to have escaped much attention, is Cameron White's form with the bat - he might have scored a couple of 40s but he is so horribly out of touch it's a big worry...he doesn't seem to be hitting many balls out of the middle at all, he's not playing many of his trademark powerful lofted shots, and his strike rate is well below what he normally achieves. For the sake of the Aussie team in the rest of this series and in the WC, let's hope BOTH Clarke and White return to their best.

  • POSTED BY riverlime on | January 26, 2011, 20:52 GMT

    @ Vishwadeep Khatri..... I Think you are giving England and Australia more credit than they are due. They have been playing limited overs cricket on pitches that would be refused even by a morgue, and someone HAS to win. It doesn't mean that either team is any good. There is no good spinner on either team, now that Swann is broken, and when the cobras in the subcontinental pitches rear up and bite their overhyped batsmen (Pietersen et al), their mediocrity will be exposed. Personally, I think Sri Lanka will boss this edition, and West Indies could just sneak in under the radar to the final four.

  • POSTED BY 5wombats on | January 26, 2011, 19:16 GMT

    England win - good call @Marcio! Are you sure your crystal ball needs upgrading!? Do you play pokies? Lotto? But you're right - not much between these sides really - except now perhaps tiredness.

  • POSTED BY stationmaster on | January 26, 2011, 19:12 GMT

    Please keep Michael Clarke in the side (says all us English folk)

  • POSTED BY phoenixsteve on | January 26, 2011, 18:57 GMT

    Finally an England win and finally we managed to post a reasonable score. As I've said before neither of these teams is playing World Cup Winning cricket yet? Both sides will have to 'up the ante' when the WC proper starts on Indian flat-tracks. Good to see Collingwood coming back to life but a shame to see Bell in decline. Hope it's just temporary. The remaining 3 games could be interesting but at present neither of these teams look to be great. Still, history shows in all International tournaments that it's the teams who improve (run into form0 DURING the tournament who usually end up winning - so maybe the current lack of sparkle is a good thing? Australia have got Ponting to come back yet- but Clark's form is miserable. Problems abound for both teams but as they say "when you find yourself in a big hole.... STOP DIGGING"!!! COME ON ENGLAND!!!

  • POSTED BY voma on | January 26, 2011, 18:41 GMT

    England have worked it out at last , post a semi decent score and our bowlers will be able to protect it . This very average Australian side will not be able to overhaul it , but we cannot expect our bowlers to perform miracles . Pieterson and Bell most come to the party , honestly if you cannot score heavily ( as trott is proving ) against these Aussie bowlers . You shouldnt be playing 1 day cricket

  • POSTED BY on | January 26, 2011, 17:56 GMT

    As an Englishman I love Michael Clarke

  • POSTED BY landl47 on | January 26, 2011, 15:45 GMT

    No, England aren't suddenly the best ODI side in the world. No, Australia can't be written off on the strength of this game. It's still two half-strength sides playing a meaningless competition. However, it was nice to see Prior show why he's back in the side and to see Colly hit a 6 and Yardy make a few. On the downside, Bell and Pietersen seem to be playing themselves out of form. For Aus, Lee was expensive, as he will be from time to time, Bolly didn't do much and Doherty showed why he's a good ODI bowler (economy 4.4) and a bad test bowler (0 wickets). England's bowling was fairly tidy and this pitch rewarded those who took the pace off the ball, so Strauss used his dibbly-dobblers. Marsh showed why he is not Aus's saviour- if a guy has only 6 first class centuries, he's not a great player. Useful, maybe, but not great, he won't make the difference in the WC.. The final score flattered Aus, they were never up with the run rate. Trott was the difference- who'd have thunk it?

  • POSTED BY on | January 26, 2011, 15:05 GMT

    Whoever at the ECB planned the tour forgot to take into consideration the WC starting 1 week after the 7th ODI! Seems like a very long tour for a touring team no matter how successful they might have been. Injuries are bound to present themselves to the English team and they might find themselves fielding a below par side for the first round of World Cup matches.

  • POSTED BY on | January 26, 2011, 14:42 GMT

    England should thank Clarke for their victory.. Some how in the 1st 3 matches.. Australia managed to win despite Clarke playing a long innings(Wasting too many balls),this time they got unlucky. At-least Ponting gets out early if he cant score. I wonder if Clarke does the same during WC in sub-continent, that could be serious danger for Aussies with batting friendly pitches.

  • POSTED BY YorkshirePudding on | January 26, 2011, 14:33 GMT

    @EccaFrog, to be Fair this is the only game hes lost so far in the ODI series, hes been poor with the bat, but to be honest hes usually rotated the bowlers effectively and out captained strauss in the other 3 games.

  • POSTED BY passionate_cricket_follower on | January 26, 2011, 14:25 GMT

    i think Cook should also be in this English line up. he too good a batsman to be ignored for ODIs. hope he does not go the VVS Laxman way, and end up not playing a WC for England (when players who are much ordinary, have got their chances!).

  • POSTED BY Dr.Qwert on | January 26, 2011, 14:20 GMT

    the most disapointing thing about this game is that Smith get figures which flatter him into getting further chances. when you come in with less than 15 overs left you have to have a strike rate of 120+, not just below 100. at the moment he doesn't have the power to bat in international limited overs cricket. & he got 3 wickets which should have been boundaries. the english clearly don't rate him & are complacent, it won't last long. 2 short wide 1s & a half volley isn't good bowling & to justify it with he's a leggy is meaningless. it's lazy batting & nothing more. he's got to hit the gym & tighten up his batting & work on his wrist position while bowling so he doesn't come right over the top if he's going to have a sustained, consistent impact at international level. trott is 1 of the premier batsmen in the world atm & no surprise he's carried his form into the ODIs... massive kudos to him!

  • POSTED BY Marcio on | January 26, 2011, 13:58 GMT

    A good win to Eng (as I correctly predicted - though I didn't predict the run fest - forgot this was @ Adelaide). You can't blame the wicket. Yeah there was an advantage in batting first, but you have to go with what you get. Anderson was an asset. Lee should have bowled slower - was hitting 150 clicks, while Anderson averaged 136 - that tells you something about how to bowl on a pitch like this. Then again, Lee was first up, so it wasn't till later that it became clear that the slower bowlers were better suited to the pitch. Trott the demon! Good to see Smith getting better. Popcorn's girlfriend must be getting excited. Give him a chance in this format! As for Michael "Brearley" Clarke, just getting kind of sad really. Doesn't even look like a state player at present. His captaincy is good though.

  • POSTED BY sgh142 on | January 26, 2011, 13:52 GMT

    Taxi for Pietersen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • POSTED BY Guernica on | January 26, 2011, 13:49 GMT

    Okay, so Trott is not the most exciting, but the fact is England have failed to bat for 50 overs in every game before this one. It's not T20, they need someone to play more than a cameo. Bell, KP and Morgan have been a big disappointment in this series, but there is still time for them to produce.

  • POSTED BY on | January 26, 2011, 13:47 GMT

    Well again Pup has failed!!! CA should give him a warning about his individual performance otherwise Aussie already have a lot of options to replace him. His job is not only to Captain well but to perform well with bat also. Ferguson is very good option for him.

  • POSTED BY on | January 26, 2011, 13:41 GMT

    @VivGilchrist : I was about to pen down the same comment; both his batting and captaincy is acting a hindrance to Oz victory

  • POSTED BY tanstell87 on | January 26, 2011, 13:39 GMT

    Indian fan here...Australia need to get rid of Clarke & Smith....they should have played Ferguson or Khawaja at 6 in the Ashes....& now they can do without Smith in the ODIs...they have to play 7 batsmen...is Tim Paine in the team against England... Australia will loose at Brisbane if they loose the toss & have to bat under lights at the Gabba...but will win this series by a 5-2 or 4-3 margin...!

  • POSTED BY simon_w on | January 26, 2011, 13:34 GMT

    @5wombats -- you'll get no abuse from me! "there isn't that much between these teams" sounds about spot on to me. It's come down to one or two individual performances on the day each time, really. Which, frankly, is a little disappointing as an England fan. After being much the better team in the Test series, and on the back of seven (was it?) straight ODI series wins, I was hoping we'd be a step or two ahead of a dodgy Aus. team. Alas, 'tis clearly not so...

  • POSTED BY on | January 26, 2011, 13:25 GMT

    Good to see England keep the series alive. There are four teams that can win the world cup - India, South Africa, Australia and England. For the world cup challenge to be more even, England should win more of the remaining.

  • POSTED BY Sud_Mos on | January 26, 2011, 13:13 GMT

    pietersen is a class act . it would be the "stupidest" thing to even think of removing him !!!

  • POSTED BY CricketingStargazer on | January 26, 2011, 13:01 GMT

    England with only 3 front-line bowlers finally manage to defend a total. To be honest, the final margin probably flattered Australia. If England can win the next one then things will start to get interesting.

  • POSTED BY pom_don on | January 26, 2011, 12:47 GMT

    Well done England although they are still not firing on all cylinders but they are coming round.........good bowling (as usual) & better batting (a bit better) as for Aus well weak batting apart from Watson (as usual) & Lee with a nice spell, Smith was more of a lucky guy in both batting & bowling (gifted a couple) & his batting is erratic to say the least, looking forward to the next one dayers & the WC........can't see Aus doing much in the WC.

  • POSTED BY ell_bee on | January 26, 2011, 12:38 GMT

    I wonder when the selectors are going to realize that there is a problem with the golden boy currently batting at number 4. Apart from the occasional success, over the past 20 odd matches, the guy's performance suggests to me that he does not make himself available for the Indian Premier league because noone would buy him

  • POSTED BY Go_SL on | January 26, 2011, 12:33 GMT

    Thanks poms for keeping the series alive. Hope that they could do the same in coming 2 matches and give us a thrilling finale.

  • POSTED BY VivGilchrist on | January 26, 2011, 12:21 GMT

    If you take away Clarkes contribution with the bat, Australia would have been left with 37 runs to get off of the last 27 balls....quite gettable really. Key for Australia - hope that pup gets out early. Key for England - don't get him out in under 20 balls.

  • POSTED BY Eccafrog on | January 26, 2011, 12:18 GMT

    Well, as predicted by all except Cricket Australia and the selectors, Michael Clarke fails again!!! Why does he use his wicket taking spinners so sparingly and take them off after the get a wicket or two. Look at the underused Smith's bowling figures, way ahead of the quicks. Really good move to bring on the wayward and erratic Lee and Bollinger for England's batting powerplay. That is where they won the game.

  • POSTED BY 5wombats on | January 26, 2011, 12:00 GMT

    Nice to win - but who'd have thought Trott would bash a ton and get 2 vital wickets!!! Didn't see that coming! I know I'll get a hail of abuse - but to be honest there isn't that much between these teams. If Australia are (suddenly) world beaters - then England are not far away. Englands turn this time to be the slightly better side. Nice to see Australian curators responding to the call to produce a spinners pitch when Swann is not in town.....

  • POSTED BY on | January 26, 2011, 11:56 GMT

    england to good, end of story. where the hell is Mitch Johnson. he has had a long enough rest. get him out there and bowling for crying out loud

  • POSTED BY MaruthuDelft on | January 26, 2011, 11:54 GMT

    Trott is quietly potent; proves many people wrong.

  • POSTED BY popcorn on | January 26, 2011, 11:43 GMT

    England won by 21 runs. The difference is exactly in the number of runs gifted by the useless Dougie Bollinger, who bowled so poorly in the Power Plays, neither did he take a wicket before that.

  • POSTED BY boris6491 on | January 26, 2011, 11:40 GMT

    Yet another game changing score by Michael Clarke... Seriously, when will the selectors wake up and figure this player is a LIABILITY in the batting? Smith, albeit a player with potential, is not near international standard yet. This leaves Australia with just 5 pure batsmen. Concerns perhaps over that fact? There definitely should be.

  • POSTED BY on | January 26, 2011, 11:37 GMT

    Kudos to England for keeping the series alive, but it was mostly because of Yardy's ending than the epitome of boredom that was Jonathan Trott. Why didn't Aus just block off the leg side against Trott? His off side play is like, yet to be seen! The guy has no power, only plays on the leg side, c'mon Clarkie, thats a major flaw in one's technique. And Australia is yet to exploit on that. What the previous Australian sides have done moreso than their talent is that they made opponent's top order feel like tail enders by setting the field very strict and attacking.

  • POSTED BY Wozza-CY on | January 26, 2011, 11:37 GMT

    Great toss for Strauss to win (again). The ball came onto the bat nicely for the first 20 overs, maybe oz left a change to a slower option a little late. England had the advantage of getting a good look at the pitch & how to bowl on it. With the variety of pitches in England north & south, they are probably more adept at summing up pitches than oz. Still, it exposed the weaknesses in the oz bowling, particularly their lack of innovation. Not enough yorkers, cutters, cross seams & slower ball varieties. Ironically this pitch displayed sub continent characteristics, hopefully the WC squad learnt from the game & the English bowlers & will put some varieties into their plans for the next few months. A lack of meaningful runs at the top of the order hurt oz in this game, also another issue to address. Strange use of the batting powerplay by oz? Glad Smith did well in this game, at 21 surely he's worth sticking with? At least the series still holds some interest at 3-1.

  • POSTED BY on | January 26, 2011, 11:36 GMT

    Good job lads. I think Pietersen needs to be placed "on rotation".

  • POSTED BY Something_Witty on | January 26, 2011, 11:29 GMT

    England batted first on an absolute road, made ~300 and won the match. No surprises here, might as well have just tossed the coin and decided the winner there. Another disgraceful pitch prepared at the Adelaide Oval. (This is a South Australian born person speaking). The one positive to come out of this was the excellent performance by Smithy. Fielded brilliantly as always, bowled exceptionally well, (Yes the dismissals might look soft, but that has always been the legspinner's blessing and curse.) and now his batting is looking good as well. Well done Smithy.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • POSTED BY Something_Witty on | January 26, 2011, 11:29 GMT

    England batted first on an absolute road, made ~300 and won the match. No surprises here, might as well have just tossed the coin and decided the winner there. Another disgraceful pitch prepared at the Adelaide Oval. (This is a South Australian born person speaking). The one positive to come out of this was the excellent performance by Smithy. Fielded brilliantly as always, bowled exceptionally well, (Yes the dismissals might look soft, but that has always been the legspinner's blessing and curse.) and now his batting is looking good as well. Well done Smithy.

  • POSTED BY on | January 26, 2011, 11:36 GMT

    Good job lads. I think Pietersen needs to be placed "on rotation".

  • POSTED BY Wozza-CY on | January 26, 2011, 11:37 GMT

    Great toss for Strauss to win (again). The ball came onto the bat nicely for the first 20 overs, maybe oz left a change to a slower option a little late. England had the advantage of getting a good look at the pitch & how to bowl on it. With the variety of pitches in England north & south, they are probably more adept at summing up pitches than oz. Still, it exposed the weaknesses in the oz bowling, particularly their lack of innovation. Not enough yorkers, cutters, cross seams & slower ball varieties. Ironically this pitch displayed sub continent characteristics, hopefully the WC squad learnt from the game & the English bowlers & will put some varieties into their plans for the next few months. A lack of meaningful runs at the top of the order hurt oz in this game, also another issue to address. Strange use of the batting powerplay by oz? Glad Smith did well in this game, at 21 surely he's worth sticking with? At least the series still holds some interest at 3-1.

  • POSTED BY on | January 26, 2011, 11:37 GMT

    Kudos to England for keeping the series alive, but it was mostly because of Yardy's ending than the epitome of boredom that was Jonathan Trott. Why didn't Aus just block off the leg side against Trott? His off side play is like, yet to be seen! The guy has no power, only plays on the leg side, c'mon Clarkie, thats a major flaw in one's technique. And Australia is yet to exploit on that. What the previous Australian sides have done moreso than their talent is that they made opponent's top order feel like tail enders by setting the field very strict and attacking.

  • POSTED BY boris6491 on | January 26, 2011, 11:40 GMT

    Yet another game changing score by Michael Clarke... Seriously, when will the selectors wake up and figure this player is a LIABILITY in the batting? Smith, albeit a player with potential, is not near international standard yet. This leaves Australia with just 5 pure batsmen. Concerns perhaps over that fact? There definitely should be.

  • POSTED BY popcorn on | January 26, 2011, 11:43 GMT

    England won by 21 runs. The difference is exactly in the number of runs gifted by the useless Dougie Bollinger, who bowled so poorly in the Power Plays, neither did he take a wicket before that.

  • POSTED BY MaruthuDelft on | January 26, 2011, 11:54 GMT

    Trott is quietly potent; proves many people wrong.

  • POSTED BY on | January 26, 2011, 11:56 GMT

    england to good, end of story. where the hell is Mitch Johnson. he has had a long enough rest. get him out there and bowling for crying out loud

  • POSTED BY 5wombats on | January 26, 2011, 12:00 GMT

    Nice to win - but who'd have thought Trott would bash a ton and get 2 vital wickets!!! Didn't see that coming! I know I'll get a hail of abuse - but to be honest there isn't that much between these teams. If Australia are (suddenly) world beaters - then England are not far away. Englands turn this time to be the slightly better side. Nice to see Australian curators responding to the call to produce a spinners pitch when Swann is not in town.....

  • POSTED BY Eccafrog on | January 26, 2011, 12:18 GMT

    Well, as predicted by all except Cricket Australia and the selectors, Michael Clarke fails again!!! Why does he use his wicket taking spinners so sparingly and take them off after the get a wicket or two. Look at the underused Smith's bowling figures, way ahead of the quicks. Really good move to bring on the wayward and erratic Lee and Bollinger for England's batting powerplay. That is where they won the game.