Australia v England, 1st Test, Brisbane, 4th day November 24, 2013

Deeper problems than first-Test nerves for England

England's recurring first-Test failure may this time point to more ingrained issues
  shares 77

Had you never seen England play Test cricket before this match in Brisbane, you would be forgiven for concluding that they had no hope of fighting their way back into this Ashes series.

This defeat was as emphatic and complete as any in recent years. Indeed, only five times in history have England lost a Test by a larger run margin. It is understandable that some are suggesting that this game may be remembered as the start of a new era. An era in which Australia hold the upper hand.

But we have seen England play before. We know that they have experienced similarly crushing defeats - Leeds 2009, Perth 2010 and Ahmedabad 2012 - and bounced back to win the next games and the series in which they were played. Perhaps they can do the same thing again?

Certainly that was the view taken by Alastair Cook. England's captain conceded that his side had been "outplayed" but then insisted that "there's plenty of time to fight back".

"We've done it a lot of times in the past and that's what we're going to have to draw upon now," he said. "In Ahmedabad everyone was looking at us and wondering how we could play cricket and we bounced back to win an amazing series in India.

"The first thing we have to do is remember we are a very good side and there are some very good players in the dressing room. We've had a bad game and we can hold our hands up and say that. But we've got 10 days now. We'll stay strong as a unit and we'll come back fighting."

Whether that proves to be wishful thinking remains to be seen but it would be a mistake to dismiss the Test as an aberration. A team that has failed to score 400 for 18 consecutive innings is not in a barren run; it is in a famine. A team who continually start poorly in series and rely on their bowlers to bail them out of tough situations are not unlucky; they are flirting with danger. This result has been an accident waiting to happen.

Just as worryingly, England have only played two Tests on quick wickets in the last four years - here and in Perth - and they have lost them both heavily. It bodes ill that Perth, perhaps the fastest wicket in the world looms again just around the corner in the third Test.

By reputation, Adelaide, the location of the second Test, is something approaching a batting paradise. It might, in normal circumstances, be expected to provide a tonic for England's beleaguered batsmen. But no-one is quite sure how the fresh drop-in pitch will play and it would seem oddly hospitable of Australia to offer anything other than another pitch of pace and bounce. There may be no respite in store.

The headlines will be dominated by Mitchell Johnson and England's batsmen's struggles against pace and bounce. Probably quite rightly, too. Even his poor deliveries - and there were a few - proved beneficial as they left the batsmen unsure what to expect from his slingy, low action. His success was another example of the benefits of unorthodoxy in cricket. The debate over whether such a player could emerge through the English system can wait for another day.

There were other issues at play apart from Johnson. England also played the offspin of Nathan Lyon like novices; the lack of an effective third seamer saw them unable to exploit Australia's position of 132 for 6 on the first day and Graeme Swann, arguably the best spinner England have ever had, was out-bowled by his Australian counterpart.

The individual form of a couple of players is causing concern, too. Jonathan Trott appears most rattled by Johnson's pace and, in his last nine Tests, has a better bowling average than batting average: 21.50 with the ball and 31.94 with the bat. Matt Prior has averaged 15 in the eight Tests he has played since May and only 17.50 in first-class cricket since the start of the last English season. He has passed 50 only once in 24 innings.

England will be loathe to abandon their consistency of selection policy, but there was just a hint that changes could be made. Ironically after a defeat due to poor batting, it is the position of Chris Tremlett, the third seamer, which is most under threat, but Trott, too, is looking as insecure as at any stage in his four-year Test career.

"We are going to have to be very honest with ourselves in how we go about trying to play Johnson," Cook said. "You can't brush the issue under the carpet, he's hurt us in this game and we're going to have to come back show our ability in the next game.

"We all need to be honest with each other as a group. It's not just those three who haven't had a good game - all eleven of us really need to improve if we want to win this series.

"Trott has had a tough game and he knows that. But you have to remember the guy is class. He is a very good player. He's had a little blip in these last couple of games but he's a class player and class players bounce back.

"I know he's been working incredibly hard at playing the short ball and anyone who has seen the net sessions can see he is trying to work on it. It is just a matter of him trying to take that into the middle. When the emotion and the pressure of the game is on, it can be quite tough to think as clearly as you need to."

In the long-term, Trott has a good chance of finding a method to deal with the line of attack with which he is confronted. He will know, too, that his captain endured a similarly grim run of form in 2010 and benefitted from England's loyalty and patience. But if the team management feel that Trott is, for now, mentally shot, he may not win a reprieve for Adelaide. It may be to his benefit that none of the squad's reserve batsmen - Jonny Bairstow, Gary Ballance or Ben Stokes - is hammering at the door of the team.

England can take consolation from one area: they know they have prevailed against Australia - with Johnson - on several previous occasions. Indeed, Trott's debut century was against an attack that included Johnson.

"We've got to look at the way we're going to play him," Cook agreed. "He's bowled well in this Test. He bowled well in Perth last time and he hurt us there.

"But there have been times in the past when we've played really well against him. We can draw on that. You can't brush the issue under the carpet, he's hurt us in this game and we're going to have to come back and show our ability in the next game."

Perhaps most damaging of all for England is the fact that this result will encourage an Australian team who have been starved of success for almost a year. Motivated and now full of confidence, they may prove hard to stop.

George Dobell is a senior correspondent at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • POSTED BY jmcilhinney on | November 26, 2013, 7:41 GMT

    As an England fan, I can draw some solace from the fact that England have proven to be slow starters of late and have been able to come back on a number of occasions. That said, there have also been occasions where they have not come back but continued to slide. The fact that they have been slow starters is in itself a problem too. We'll certainly know more after the next game. If England play as poorly again then there's a fair chance that it will be that way for the series and, if the Ashes are not already gone by that stage, they soon will be. If they bounce back and match or better Australia then the momentum will have shifted somewhat and they can hopefully ride that through. They'll need more from pretty much everyone in the next game, with Broad being pretty much the only one who can genuinely hold his head high. Maybe if the Australian crowd was to boo the rest of the team too...

  • POSTED BY Cpt.Meanster on | November 26, 2013, 0:19 GMT

    I seriously think England can make a come back BUT this was said of the 2009/10 Aussies but they failed to come back igniting England's dominant Ashes position since then. Honestly, some is REALLY wrong with England. The players all look uninterested, unperturbed as if they don't care. Perhaps England are in decline ? For the sake of their fans, hopefully not. But funnier things have happened in cricket.

  • POSTED BY ThatsJustCricket on | November 25, 2013, 23:45 GMT

    @heathrf1974, and here we are. The poms just lost one test and we are onto the excuses list already? OMG...

  • POSTED BY Shaggy076 on | November 25, 2013, 20:32 GMT

    Blue-collar; Did you ever pass Maths at school? Can you try and explain your logic again. You do realise if the series stayed at 1-0 Australia would get the urn. Thus Australia are in front.

  • POSTED BY on | November 25, 2013, 18:08 GMT

    Srini_Chennai - hats off to you Sir!!!! you said it " It is ironic that most of the English fans calls India as FTB but now they're praying for featherbed in Adelaide. Loving it!!" The funniest thing is that England always claim to play well against 'fast' bowling.. What they really mean by 'fast' is medium pace!! It will be easier proposition to face Umesh Yadav and Mohd.Shami in 2014!, one would think...

  • POSTED BY mikeyp147 on | November 25, 2013, 15:49 GMT

    To be honest, this has been on the cards for a while. The 3-0 Ashes win at home papered over several cracks, but there were plenty of warning signs.

    For me, we have three major problems:

    1) We're not as good as we think we are. See Pakistan away, SA at home and New Zealand away for evidence.

    2) We're far too negative - we bat too slowly and allow the opposition to settle in and seize the advantage. Field-placing and bowling changes are unimaginative.

    3) We haven't got an out-and-out pace bowler to blow teams away, like Johnson did to us. We haven't since Flintoff and Harmison were at their peak.

    Flower's cautious approach seems to have translated into attritional, negative cricket and we don't stand a chance against the rejuvenated Aussies unless we change that pretty quickly. I think this will be Flower's last series as coach, whatever happens.

  • POSTED BY on | November 25, 2013, 12:55 GMT

    Prior seems to be passing under the radar but has he scored more than 40 in any innings for Country or County since March? He looks nervy at the crease. It's the batting that is a major worry. Without significant run on the board it will be hard to put pressure on even a fragile Australian line up. Without Trott there is now huge pressure on Cook to deliver as well as captain

  • POSTED BY Robertjohn on | November 25, 2013, 9:20 GMT

    I am not so sure things are so gloomy for England.... - Of the top 6 for Aust, 4 are not making runs and their positions are not secure. Normally 1 or 2 would be acceptable to be struggling a bit. - In Englands top order, 4 of the 6 were reasonably comfortable with pace in Brisbane (Cook, Carb..., Bell, Root)

    England just had a shocker in Brisbane, reports are distorting reality.

  • POSTED BY Mr.PotatoesTomatoes on | November 25, 2013, 8:16 GMT

    Tue that England have prevailed against an Australian side that included Johnson before,but the Johnson on view these days is a vastly changed quick bowler.Johnson looks a far more relaxed cricketer now.He looks a lot more calm,a lot more assured of his place in the side,and very aware of the role he has to play in the bowling unit.It was on Cricinfo that I read recently about how he was in a happy space with a far more settled personal life, and with only cricket to worry about he looks a transformed bowler.I think English batters will do well to play out Johnson safely and be a bit more aggressive against the other bowlers.

  • POSTED BY Nutcutlet on | November 25, 2013, 8:02 GMT

    Losing the first Test is nothing new. It's the way England clears the throat before launching into a sublime aria that transports the team & their supporters to a triumphant series win. That's the way Cook & Flower may well choose to view this abject performance, but if they do they'll be kidding themsleves. There is a world of difference between what went on at the Gabba &, say, Ahmedabad. There, Eng fought hard (4th inns 406 in 154 overs) while carrying an ineffectual & unfit Broad through cracked selection-thinking. That defeat came with honour; this one didn't. Broad may be back, Root looks as if he has the ticker & Cook still fights hard. But the sum of the parts really amounted to very little. England's banker mid-order bats, Trott, KP & IB aggregated 135 in 6 inns. No side in history wins with that sort of contribution. And the solution for sub 200 scores? Probably drop Tremlett for X! This drubbing is more than 1-0; it's yet another exposure of Eng's lack of batting technique.

  • POSTED BY jmcilhinney on | November 26, 2013, 7:41 GMT

    As an England fan, I can draw some solace from the fact that England have proven to be slow starters of late and have been able to come back on a number of occasions. That said, there have also been occasions where they have not come back but continued to slide. The fact that they have been slow starters is in itself a problem too. We'll certainly know more after the next game. If England play as poorly again then there's a fair chance that it will be that way for the series and, if the Ashes are not already gone by that stage, they soon will be. If they bounce back and match or better Australia then the momentum will have shifted somewhat and they can hopefully ride that through. They'll need more from pretty much everyone in the next game, with Broad being pretty much the only one who can genuinely hold his head high. Maybe if the Australian crowd was to boo the rest of the team too...

  • POSTED BY Cpt.Meanster on | November 26, 2013, 0:19 GMT

    I seriously think England can make a come back BUT this was said of the 2009/10 Aussies but they failed to come back igniting England's dominant Ashes position since then. Honestly, some is REALLY wrong with England. The players all look uninterested, unperturbed as if they don't care. Perhaps England are in decline ? For the sake of their fans, hopefully not. But funnier things have happened in cricket.

  • POSTED BY ThatsJustCricket on | November 25, 2013, 23:45 GMT

    @heathrf1974, and here we are. The poms just lost one test and we are onto the excuses list already? OMG...

  • POSTED BY Shaggy076 on | November 25, 2013, 20:32 GMT

    Blue-collar; Did you ever pass Maths at school? Can you try and explain your logic again. You do realise if the series stayed at 1-0 Australia would get the urn. Thus Australia are in front.

  • POSTED BY on | November 25, 2013, 18:08 GMT

    Srini_Chennai - hats off to you Sir!!!! you said it " It is ironic that most of the English fans calls India as FTB but now they're praying for featherbed in Adelaide. Loving it!!" The funniest thing is that England always claim to play well against 'fast' bowling.. What they really mean by 'fast' is medium pace!! It will be easier proposition to face Umesh Yadav and Mohd.Shami in 2014!, one would think...

  • POSTED BY mikeyp147 on | November 25, 2013, 15:49 GMT

    To be honest, this has been on the cards for a while. The 3-0 Ashes win at home papered over several cracks, but there were plenty of warning signs.

    For me, we have three major problems:

    1) We're not as good as we think we are. See Pakistan away, SA at home and New Zealand away for evidence.

    2) We're far too negative - we bat too slowly and allow the opposition to settle in and seize the advantage. Field-placing and bowling changes are unimaginative.

    3) We haven't got an out-and-out pace bowler to blow teams away, like Johnson did to us. We haven't since Flintoff and Harmison were at their peak.

    Flower's cautious approach seems to have translated into attritional, negative cricket and we don't stand a chance against the rejuvenated Aussies unless we change that pretty quickly. I think this will be Flower's last series as coach, whatever happens.

  • POSTED BY on | November 25, 2013, 12:55 GMT

    Prior seems to be passing under the radar but has he scored more than 40 in any innings for Country or County since March? He looks nervy at the crease. It's the batting that is a major worry. Without significant run on the board it will be hard to put pressure on even a fragile Australian line up. Without Trott there is now huge pressure on Cook to deliver as well as captain

  • POSTED BY Robertjohn on | November 25, 2013, 9:20 GMT

    I am not so sure things are so gloomy for England.... - Of the top 6 for Aust, 4 are not making runs and their positions are not secure. Normally 1 or 2 would be acceptable to be struggling a bit. - In Englands top order, 4 of the 6 were reasonably comfortable with pace in Brisbane (Cook, Carb..., Bell, Root)

    England just had a shocker in Brisbane, reports are distorting reality.

  • POSTED BY Mr.PotatoesTomatoes on | November 25, 2013, 8:16 GMT

    Tue that England have prevailed against an Australian side that included Johnson before,but the Johnson on view these days is a vastly changed quick bowler.Johnson looks a far more relaxed cricketer now.He looks a lot more calm,a lot more assured of his place in the side,and very aware of the role he has to play in the bowling unit.It was on Cricinfo that I read recently about how he was in a happy space with a far more settled personal life, and with only cricket to worry about he looks a transformed bowler.I think English batters will do well to play out Johnson safely and be a bit more aggressive against the other bowlers.

  • POSTED BY Nutcutlet on | November 25, 2013, 8:02 GMT

    Losing the first Test is nothing new. It's the way England clears the throat before launching into a sublime aria that transports the team & their supporters to a triumphant series win. That's the way Cook & Flower may well choose to view this abject performance, but if they do they'll be kidding themsleves. There is a world of difference between what went on at the Gabba &, say, Ahmedabad. There, Eng fought hard (4th inns 406 in 154 overs) while carrying an ineffectual & unfit Broad through cracked selection-thinking. That defeat came with honour; this one didn't. Broad may be back, Root looks as if he has the ticker & Cook still fights hard. But the sum of the parts really amounted to very little. England's banker mid-order bats, Trott, KP & IB aggregated 135 in 6 inns. No side in history wins with that sort of contribution. And the solution for sub 200 scores? Probably drop Tremlett for X! This drubbing is more than 1-0; it's yet another exposure of Eng's lack of batting technique.

  • POSTED BY vj_gooner on | November 25, 2013, 7:44 GMT

    First win after 9 winless matches is a huge huge bonus! I don't think Oz will get complacent as this will give them some much needed confidence! #ReturnTheUrn

    @ heathrf1974 - Learning to win under different conditions takes a back step. Returning the Urn is the TOP priority!

  • POSTED BY Satish.V on | November 25, 2013, 7:29 GMT

    It would be wrong to compare the defeat at the Gabba with what happened in Ahmedabad & then assume England will stage a similar comeback. The series in India had several contributing factors. Cook & KP were at the peak of their powers. Swann ,Monty & Anderson were brilliant against a batting order that was carrying 3-4 batsmen who were in horrendous form.The Indian bowling attack, barring Ojha was absolutely listless . Right now, the English top order is short of runs & the bowling attack looks a little lost(except Broad). The 3-0 scoreline in the previous series is misleading . England did not comprehensively outplay Australia as the results suggest. I dont see England winning at Perth unless they miraculously find a way to counter Johnson & co.Adelaide has a fresh pitch. No idea how it will behave. Melbourne has always had something in there for the quicks. Looking at the current picture, Sydney is the only place where they might salvage something.

  • POSTED BY popcorn on | November 25, 2013, 5:56 GMT

    This is EXACTLY what happened after we lost The Ashes in England in 2005,and decimated England in the 2006 -07 Return Ashes Series in Australia 5 nil.Those of you who saw how both Series, will remember tha tKevin Pietersen got out IN IDENTICAL FASHION in the SAME POSITION at the Gabba: In 2006 -07.he was caught by Damien Martyn off Brett Lee, this time he was caught by George Bailey off Ryan Harris. BOTH IDENTICAL STROKES.So KP can be targetted with the same ball and field AGAIN!

  • POSTED BY heathrf1974 on | November 25, 2013, 5:49 GMT

    I hope the drop-in pitch at Adelaide is a more traditional one and not like the one at the Gabba. The Aussies need to learn to win under different conditions.

  • POSTED BY Srini_Indian on | November 25, 2013, 4:40 GMT

    "England can take consolation from one area: they know they have prevailed against Australia - with Johnson - on several previous occasions. Indeed, Trott's debut century was against an attack that included Johnson." Dobell, you got to point it out that Trott's century was in 2nd innings of minefield of a track in Oval. It doesn't matter how you twist your words to convince us that England's problem is minor, they have only played 3 tests in quick wickets in last 5 years. Perth, Brisbane and Johannesburg. England were smashed in all three matches. It is ironic that most of the English fans calls India as FTB but now they're praying for featherbed in Adelaide. Loving it!!

  • POSTED BY on | November 25, 2013, 4:38 GMT

    England needs to find one or two gun barrel fast bowler who can consistently bowl at 145+kph for the Perth test . If not they will just be turning up for the match with foregone conclusion.

  • POSTED BY AussieSam on | November 25, 2013, 4:03 GMT

    Like Chappell has said, if anyone should replace Trott at no. 3 it should be Bell. The no. 3 has to have two qualities: be solid as a rock, and be able to score freely. You could argue Pietersen has both of those but he is actually quite vulnerable early on, mostly because he can't stand facing an over without scoring. Root is the only other prospect but technically he isn't quite as solid as he needs to be, especially early on. Lately, Bell looks impossible to get out from ball 1. If he moves up they could put Bairstow or Ballance in the middle order

    Having said all that though, I don't think Trott will be dropped for Adelaide. Firstly, just because, as Cook said, he is a class player who will almost certainly bounce back soon. And secondly, because Adelaide isn't known for the pace and bounce that have troubled him. Although, Dobell makes a good point, since this is going to be a drop in pitch, it might not be the batting paradise that England are expecting and probably hoping for.

  • POSTED BY humdrum on | November 25, 2013, 3:16 GMT

    @andrew-schulz:another one if you please---- he bowls em at their feet he bowls em at their head and when he gets it right they are all dead.

  • POSTED BY RJHB on | November 25, 2013, 3:01 GMT

    That last statement is perhaps the biggest key point of all. Australia are full of confidence now, shooting off some mouth, having just a touch of arrogance. They play at their best that way, always have. Everyone else may find it distasteful and ugly. Whatever! We all know what England can do, but will they do it? They're a good team, not great but good, certainly as a team better than Australia I reckon. But they don't look all that hungry, not particularly inspired, a bit like South Africa did when they first got to no.1 only to slip and let India take over for a couple of years. No England have a lot going against them at the moment, it'll take some big individual performances to get the team up to beat Australia. It may happen, but I wouldn't count on it pommy lovers!

  • POSTED BY humdrum on | November 25, 2013, 2:55 GMT

    Well,at least there is a grudging,albeit belated recognition,that problems do exist for this eng team and they need to be addressed,unlike the series in eng where the attitude was ' we are underperforming but still beating you' and suchlike.Just wonder where the next gen of batsmen is coming from. Cook,Bell and KP will continue to be the mainstay,so at least one of them needs to score big. And bar Broad,no other bowler looks good enough( on recent performance) to play for eng in test matches. Tis no use sitting on past glories,else the same story will continue.

  • POSTED BY KPWij on | November 25, 2013, 2:29 GMT

    The result of the first test is not a surprising one. Australia have been improving continuously during the last 3 tests since the mauling at Lords. If the weather and a rampaging Stuart Broad spell didn't get in the way back in England the series may have gone the way of Australia as well. What I have observed is that England have begun to stagnate since the extraordinary performances in India. With the exception of Bell, Cook and Broad most of the team have been going through a poor patch of form and confidence. Whereas Australia have a damaging opening batsmen in Warner finding form, the best batsmen in the world in the middle order and all the other batsmen finding their feet on the international stage. Combine this with a lethal bowling attack having the experience of Harris and Siddle, Mitchell "Chopper Read" Johnson sending shivers down the spine of all batsmen and Lyon learning his art, a bright future lays ahead for Australia and interesting matches for all to watch!

  • POSTED BY chicko1983 on | November 25, 2013, 1:49 GMT

    @shot274: "a team inferior on paper" - what piece of paper are you looking at? Clarke is the best batsman out of either team, on paper, and the Aussie quick bowlers are all better than their English counterparts, on paper (check out averages and strikerates of Harris v Broad, Johnson v Anderson, Siddle v Tremlett). Add to the fact Lyon has a far better record than Swann in their Ashes tests, and same goes with Haddin against Prior. Then compare Warner to Carberry - Warner would outperform him, on paper. Given the form over the last year, Watson clearly outperforms Trott (Watson second most runs in English Ashes series) and he can bowl a lot better as well. So there are 8 Aussie players better than their counterparts, on paper. Bell, Pietersen and Cook would get picked for Australia at the moment (though Cook as batsman only). But other than those three, the Aussies are superior, on paper.

  • POSTED BY InsideHedge on | November 25, 2013, 1:02 GMT

    How did Matt Prior go from saving the Test against NZ last winter to one half century in 24 innings?

  • POSTED BY andrew-schulz on | November 25, 2013, 0:51 GMT

    Samar Singh, there are a few that come to mind which the Army should sing after the fifth Test if things keep moving: One could be: he bowls very fast, he bowls very straight. That Mitchell Johnson, his bowling is great. Another, which is actually enhanced by the imperfect rhyme: He smashes their ribs, he smashes their scones, that Mitchell Johnson's too good for the poms. Sing it with humility England.

  • POSTED BY ShutTheGate on | November 25, 2013, 0:45 GMT

    Yes Cooky, your team has had success against Johnston and our current attack (minus Lyon) in the past. However that was before McDermott became the Australian bowling coach who has been revolutionary for our bowling. Similar to the amazing effect Flower has had on your team. So it's like comparing apples with oranges.

  • POSTED BY andrew-schulz on | November 25, 2013, 0:42 GMT

    Wonderful maths, BlueyCollar. Now let's go over it one more time. Australia lead 1-0. If there were now four draws, what would the score be then? There is also a little factor called momentum.

  • POSTED BY espncricinfomobile on | November 25, 2013, 0:32 GMT

    I thought Finn was injured, why else would they play Tremlett? He was good last time England toured Australia, but he seems to have lost 10km/h somewhere along the way. If England are looking for a Johnson type bowler, Steven Finn is that man.

    We Australians tend to get ahead of ourselves but let me tell you right now, my fellow countrymen. Trott, Prior and Bell WILL be back, they are all class. However I am not convinced that Root has the mentality to overcome the damage done by Johnson in this test.

    The main thing I took from the Gabba test and it is a concern for England is that when required, their bowlers struggled to hit 140km/h. I thought Jimmy Anderson in recent years bowled within himself and had a bit extra up his sleeve, apparently not. When Australia were on the ropes in the first innings, England needed someone of sheer pace to rip through the tail.

    Steven Finn has to play in Adelaide/Perth.

  • POSTED BY Robster1 on | November 25, 2013, 0:12 GMT

    Joburg in 2010 saw England's batsman get blown away by Morkel, Steyn and co on a quick Wanderers wicket. Trott and Prior need to hit form fast, otherwise their medium term poor performances will see them replaced by Balance, Buttler etc. And both Trott and Prior are the wrong side of thirty. Adelaide will be a draw, but Perth with it's electric wicket....

  • POSTED BY whensdrinks on | November 24, 2013, 23:36 GMT

    @Mervo - gotta agree about the pitch. Well done Kevin. I pray that Australia never does what India and England have done and doctors all the pitches to suit their team. We have a variety of pitches and the team that can play the best on all the different types deserves to win. Adelaide may prove a tricky pitch, it isn't producing a lot of runs so it may be a slower pitch that is hard to score quickly on.

  • POSTED BY OneEyedAussie on | November 24, 2013, 23:36 GMT

    There is no need for the English to hit the panic button. Last tour they were well on the backfoot in Brisbane but the pitch flattening out combined with some pretty mediocre Aus bowling saved them. They then went on to win convincingly in Adelaide, Melb. and Sydney. England can easily do the same here. The only player I would have concerns about would be Trott, but could Ballance do any beter?

  • POSTED BY GurSinghgur on | November 24, 2013, 23:31 GMT

    What has happened to Matt Prior's batting? He was once the man you could rely on in the middle order to save England from a bad patch. Not for many matches now.

  • POSTED BY Optic on | November 24, 2013, 23:17 GMT

    @Benjamin Aulakh Monty is not in a million years a better spinner than Swann and that's been proven. Have you not forgotten the recent NZ series in NZ where he played because of Swann;s injury, he got out bowled by Martin. Then how easily Swann dismissed the same batsmen in England. The fact is Monty is only ever brought in on absolute bunsens and then doesn't even outbowl Swann half the time. All you have to do is look at Swann's international record, then look at Monty's. When England only scored 130 odd in the first inning it was always going to be easy for Aus to chance their arm against Swann on a pitch not doing much.

    By the way we have played one test out of 5, how can you compare this series to last. Last time England got over 300 6 times Ays only managed it twice and when big moments were their to be won, the England bowlers delivered with Swann taking 27 wickets Anderson 24 etc. From that comment it makes me think you didn't watch the last series.

  • POSTED BY Clarence2020 on | November 24, 2013, 23:16 GMT

    Great win but early days. A concern remains Australia's batting. While Warner's two innings a real boost, there was still too much reliance on the usual suspects, Clarke and the bottom five. If Australia is going to win this series a bigger and more consistent batting performance is going to be needed by Australia's top six.

  • POSTED BY dunger.bob on | November 24, 2013, 23:12 GMT

    Apparently the pitch in Adelaide is expected to spin. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Johnson is rested for that match and a second spinner brought in to replace him.

    @ Samar: We duck to the left, we duck to the right. But wherever we go, he gives us a fright.

  • POSTED BY camcove on | November 24, 2013, 23:04 GMT

    As a follower from a distance of English cricket and an ardent Aussie fan, I have been perplexed by the seemingly sudden fall from grace of Nick Compton. I watched that absorbing series in NZ, and he looked the goods, I thought. I know he is over 30, BUT... I don't agree with the idea of bringing Bell up to 3. He is your best batsman in my view, and has had great success where he bats. He was the difference in the last series. Few mention Bresnan. If he is fit, I would assume he replaces Tremlett (who is a shadow of the player in the last Ashes series in Oz). Swann in that last Aussie leg did very well in Adelaide, and that may have a positive impact on his confidence. We still have our batting problems - there are a few youngsters comiing on (eg Maddinson). I was interested in KO'K's endorsement of O'Keefe as a finger spinner for Oz (in case two spinners are needed at some time). I have always thought that Holland does more with the ball, but SOK's record almost demands consideration.

  • POSTED BY on | November 24, 2013, 23:00 GMT

    How about just swapping Bell and Trott. Bell seems to have the most orderly technique of any of the current players (apart from Cook) and it's just possible that if Trott didn't have the pressure of coming in at first drop he might do better. Unless Ballance does exceptionally in the tour match it's hard to see him being parachuted in.

    As for the bowling, I thought Ando and Broad did well (particularly Broad obviously). Steady as she goes and no need to panic - I also doubt if Aus would have done so well in the 2nd innings if they hadn't had the luxury of being so far ahead. But Tremlett does need to go, he was simply too slow for these pitches. He didn't do so terribly badly, but he never really looked threatening, even when he was taking wickets. For my money, Rankin is a better bet than Finn. In the warm-ups, Rankin was a lot more accurate and probably only needed to push his length a few inches fuller. Either Rankin or Finn would also be way quicker, which is desperately needed.

  • POSTED BY on | November 24, 2013, 22:46 GMT

    Swann arguably the best spinner England have ever had? Do behave. Arguably the second spinner at best. Derek Underwood, Jim Laker? How old are you?

  • POSTED BY Macker60 on | November 24, 2013, 22:29 GMT

    Roshan_P, Australia tried the youth policy and the last few years have shown the results, Hadden, Bailey and Rogers came into the side on Form and to add maturity to the Side, This help Clarke out, Also the Bowlers were Picked on Form not Reputation, I have mention this before there are about 10 top bowlers in Australia All geared up for the Ashes And all angry, I have not seen this approach to bowling by Australia for a Long time. As for Batsmen Australia's best batsmen general shine when they are around 25, yes you do get the odd ones Clarke Pointing etc, Now you have a group off batsmen running around getting 100 and 200 in the shield with maturity that will be coming thru, Remember Boof picks the best TEAM, Not the best players, And he has a proven track record doing this, He also surrounds himself with good supporting Coaches.

  • POSTED BY TheBigBoodha on | November 24, 2013, 22:24 GMT

    England can bounce back, but the team, media and fans would do well to it the victim/conspiracy stuff out. Good teams and players don't do victim. You can't use the media the way the team did in England with the Warner incident, then come hear and moan when a tabloid does the same thing here. You can't have Jimmy clipping Clarke with his pad in public and boasting about it in a book, saying he despises the guy, then moan when that same guy gives you a verbal serving n his own country. Loved it that it was Warner serving it up in the media. Let's call it karma.

    Anyway, I hope AUS don't back down. In 2008 the Indians successfully used the media to intimidate the AUS team when the Indians were getting thrashed. Jayawardene tried it last season, too. Nonsense about pitch doctoring and ball tampering, it's an old ploy. I don't think Australia will fall for it again.

  • POSTED BY Beertjie on | November 24, 2013, 22:18 GMT

    It's not knee-jerk if England recognize the need to make changes rather than papering over the cracks. For Adelaide: Cook, Carberry, Bell, Pieterson, Root, Bairstow, Stokes, Bresnan, Broad, Swann, Anderson. For the WACA: Cook, Carberry, Bell, Pieterson, Root, Bairstow, Stokes/Ballance, Bresnan, Broad, Finn/Rankin, Anderson. Horses for courses!

  • POSTED BY wellrounded87 on | November 24, 2013, 22:16 GMT

    Swann has always struggled in Aus. His average here is well over 40 if i'm not mistaken. I still think he's world class but Australian pitches are something of a bogey for him.

    Lyon is a quality spinner in Australian conditions and should do really well in Adelaide.

    Great win for us, but if we think short pitched fast bowling is going to win the series we're in for a rude surprise. The English batting lineup is all class and I have no doubts they'll be much better prepared for the short stuff in Adelaide. There'll probably be a lot less pace and bounce too, I expect Swann will be a much bigger factor in the next test.

  • POSTED BY Cpt.Meanster on | November 24, 2013, 22:08 GMT

    For Adelaide, I feel Bell should be no.3 because his technique is sublime. He can attack or defend according to the situation. KP is my no.4 as always and I will push Trott down the order at 5. Sounds odd ? Well, the reason why I would push Trott down is because he's easily intimidated by the Aussies. He gets 'angry' quickly and is susceptible to playing rash shots at the wrong time. The Aussies have started to indulge in mental disintegration which Steve Waugh and co. used to do so eloquently. England are a good team and I hope they come back strongly. Adelaide won't bounce much but it would definitely spin. England could play Swann and Monty. That would get rid of Tremlett and bringing in Bresnan as an all-rounder to cover for the 3rd seamer. That also means, sacrificing a specialist batsman for Bresnan. Plenty to think for England in the coming days. This is NOT a time for panic. 4 more games to go.

  • POSTED BY on | November 24, 2013, 21:52 GMT

    I reckon England are missing Bresnan most of all, any chance he will be back for Adelaide?

    The pitch there is going to be an unknown quantity but it seems it's turned into a spinners pitch with both Botha and Zampa taking a bag load of wickets there this season, this might just bring Swann right back into the series. The slower nature of the pitch will also suit Trott and Bell a lot better, I'm expecting England to be far more competitive in the city of churches. Broad too could be a handful if it breaks up and provides variable bounce like traditional Adelaide wickets.

    Aus have caught England off guard here but I'm not sure they'll be provided that opportunity again in the second test.

  • POSTED BY yorkshire-86 on | November 24, 2013, 21:29 GMT

    KP is not a 3, in fact he is barely a 4. 5 is his natural position.

  • POSTED BY akpy on | November 24, 2013, 21:17 GMT

    Why is English batsmen struggling (and afraid we are told) against pace and bounce? Thought that is the problem only for sub-continent cricketers if you believe the great english experts like Nasser Hussain, Botham, David Lloyd and of course the english supporters who post on this site about other test playing nations. Oh, may be this is the nature of the game and they realise it now

  • POSTED BY milepost on | November 24, 2013, 21:02 GMT

    I agree that Bell should move to 3, he caned Australia all summer is is likely to be among the runs here if he can handle Mitch. I suppose he has to handle all our other bowlers first but he is most likely with Cook and KP to score. The others? Well Tremlett, Trott and Prior have surely played their last games on this tour and likely in an England shirt. Those touting a placid Adelaide pitch, don't be so sure, why not produce a wicket England won't pass 200 on lol!? I hope they have lots of sunscreen for their days on end in the field. We saw this coming, I'm really surprised that so many, especially professional writers couldn't see this happening, even last summer.

  • POSTED BY Digimont on | November 24, 2013, 20:31 GMT

    On the subject of batting order...one thing is certain England. Get your best batsman (Bell) as high up as possible. Why? Because he's further from the tail. If you leave him where he is, mark my words, you will see him wasted, stranded on 20 not out....and that won't help your outlook.

  • POSTED BY CodandChips on | November 24, 2013, 20:25 GMT

    @Bill Edmumds agree on Finn over Tremlett because Finn takes wickets. I was preaching this before the test. I also agree with Bell at 3. But disagree with Trott/Bairstow at 6. Trott is too out of sorts. Bairstow should only be in the side to keep; he has a modest record in all forms for England. I would prefer Balance, or even (Taylor/Woakes) Ben Stokes to add an extra bowling option

  • POSTED BY Roshan_P on | November 24, 2013, 20:12 GMT

    Really odd selection choices in having Ballance and Bairstow, both lower order batsmen, in the squad when it is Trott who is most likely going to be replaced in the batting order. I say move Pietersen or Root to 3, and put Ballance in. He's got a good first-class record. Also odd that Australia chose to go with George Bailey. Tenacious, but more of a thumper than a true Test match quality player. Next you'll want Aaron Finch in the Test team. They should have gone for a younger batsman who has a good first-class record, e.g. Maddinson, and try him out when they are at home against a weakened England team. Bailey will not be a future Test cricket star!

  • POSTED BY CodandChips on | November 24, 2013, 20:11 GMT

    @Benjamin Aulakh agree with you on last series and Bell but it does the one match wonder contributions of Root, Broad & Anderson and the series consistent Swann a disservice.

    But on Swann, what planet are you on? Monty isn't half the spinner Swann is.

  • POSTED BY on | November 24, 2013, 20:10 GMT

    good article George, but you forgot Jo'burg in 2010 where England were also hammered.

  • POSTED BY 64blip on | November 24, 2013, 20:05 GMT

    I tend to agree with shot274, England's batting has become too conservative. Watson bowling maiden after maiden this summer was just weird. Fair enough, we won the series 3-0, but I think the limitations of such an approach are apparent on Australian pitches.

  • POSTED BY Roshan_P on | November 24, 2013, 20:02 GMT

    England are missing the consistency and tirelessness of Bresnan (not to mention a good in-form batsman). @ nareshgb1 I find it amazing how you compare one of England's greatest bowlers of all time to Ishant Sharma. Anderson may be just going through a poor run of form now, like so many of the other England players. The problem is that so many of the players are out of form, compared with India who have so many in-form players now. Maybe it's time to mix it up a bit with the line-up. They are doing that with Carberry and Tremlett, but I think they could play Rankin in the next match. They also don't have a really good batsman in their reserves (Ballance is untried, so it would be risky to take a punt on him) and the lack of a good top-order replacement for Trott could be costly. Maybe Root or Pietersen to 3 and Ballance at 5 or 6?

  • POSTED BY Mervo on | November 24, 2013, 19:58 GMT

    Don't worry fellas. We will dish up a nice soft slow wicket in Adelaide. In Australia we don't change our wickets to suit the bowlers that we have. Everyone knows that Brisbane and Perth are quicker and the rest softer and that Sydney suits the spinners most of all. I wish some other countries could make a cricket ground and wicket like we say at the Gabba in Brisbane. It was just stunning and the whole field looked like a painting. Not a dust bowl with a rolled mud wicket and a small dry field. It took harsh sun, rain and hail and still looked fantastic. It really set a new standard, even in Australia and congrats to Kevin Mitchell Jr.

  • POSTED BY on | November 24, 2013, 19:57 GMT

    I would prefer to see Bell at three as he looked our best batsman last summer and bats in front of Trott for Warwickshire and has also spent the last few years batting with the lower order batsmen. then Root could bat five and either Trott or Bairstow at six. As far as the bowling goes Finn takes wickets while Tremlett is accurate but not so dangerous.

  • POSTED BY on | November 24, 2013, 19:34 GMT

    The only difference between this series and the previous one in England is that in this one, Bell didn't save them. And Swann is not even the best spinner England have at the moment, Monty has always been far more threatening as a wicket taking bowler than him!!!

  • POSTED BY GautiGambhir on | November 24, 2013, 18:44 GMT

    i agree with tony here, why not pietersen at no 3 ?

  • POSTED BY on | November 24, 2013, 17:59 GMT

    Some problems looming large for England here. Majority of the team are in their 30s. Carberry looking all at seas facing Lyon. Trott & Prior looking like the walking wicket that Vaughn ended up becoming. Tremlett being seriously off the pace. Anderson looking innocuous for the most part.

    So, yeah, at some point in the Series you'll have to drop Tremlett, Trott, Prior & Carberry.

  • POSTED BY shot274 on | November 24, 2013, 17:59 GMT

    For me the main difference between the teams is attitude; England have got to get out of this safety mode. They have been outplayed by a team who on paper are inferior to them but plays gutsy cricket. Take for instance Tremletts inclusion-so that they can have a 'holding 'bowler. Steven Finn is the obvious choice but not if all you want is safety and someone trundling and holding an end. And forget about his second innings wickets. the match was gone by then. The batting in the second innings was unenterprising and there was so little effort to dominate. they had nothing to loose because 561 was never onn!Get rid of all this quorn food and health fads, grow some and be aggressive England!

  • POSTED BY BlueyCollar on | November 24, 2013, 17:54 GMT

    The Urn is the prize! Given Australia need to win the series where as England only need a draw, the series is now even with 4 tests to play.

  • POSTED BY nareshgb1 on | November 24, 2013, 17:29 GMT

    The big problem is Jimmy Anderson. He has been below par since after the first Ashes tets in England earlier thsi year. He seems to have suddenly gone over the hill - or is at that stage where a bowler needs 6 months off (e.g. Garner in 1983-84). Unfortunately he is not getting that time off - so unless this aspect improves for England, they are in trouble. Given that they are eseentially a 4 bowler attack, its VERY hard if one of the guys (who BTW is the "spearhead") is not getting wickets. It allows a team to recover from 130/6 to 294. And the energy erosion from bowling that bit longer affects the entire attack.

    Unless Anderson gets better, he's gonna be "England's Ishant" (he who described himself as "spearhead of Indian attack" - yeah I know there are several funny giggles in that one line :).

    Mitchell Johnson - he coul dfall apart any moment, as could Harris. But for that, England need to create some pressure - its not coming their way with Ishant....err, Jimmy.

  • POSTED BY android_user on | November 24, 2013, 17:27 GMT

    Eng team mngmnt has been duped by Warne by his pre-ashes suggestions that Carberry shud open the batting . it has given an opportunity for an early opening for the Aussies.

  • POSTED BY MiddleStump on | November 24, 2013, 16:59 GMT

    The sad fact is that the possible replacements are not likely to fare a whole lot better in the current scenario. Trott, Swann and Prior have had a poor match but they deserve one more chance in Adelaide to bounce back. There were no genuine fast bowlers at the Gabba to trouble Australia. Finn must replace Tremlett. There could be one change in the batting order. Root can bat higher at 3, and Trott could drop down to 5 or 6. That may also help Trott find his form.

  • POSTED BY Front-Foot-Lunge-Needs-A-Hug on | November 24, 2013, 16:58 GMT

    Carberry can be a destructive player. I've seen him rip it up at county level and I reckon he's up for test cricket. Forget about Root and the future, you guys need a competitive team ready to go in about ten days lol!

  • POSTED BY SamRoy on | November 24, 2013, 16:57 GMT

    I think in Adelaide and Sydney, England has a very good chance of winning but it will lose in Perth. MCG -- well it depends on the pitch. Wanderers loss (second fastest pitch), Perth loss (fastest pitch) and now Brisbane (only decently fast pitch) loss. This team can't play pace and bounce.

  • POSTED BY on | November 24, 2013, 16:55 GMT

    Given Prior and Trott barely contributed in the English Ashes, I would have hoped they'd have been working very hard to iron out technique flaws in their game to ensure they contribute down under. Both again looked very poor indeed... whilst no doubt they will retain their places, if they don't sort their issues out, perhaps they need to go back to county cricket, or retire....

  • POSTED BY android_user on | November 24, 2013, 16:52 GMT

    Carberry out of the blue at 30+.Nick Compton would have been a safer bet. most of d eng players are pushing mid thirties and no quality young players in sight as well.looks like English cricket is going the '90s way

  • POSTED BY SamRoy on | November 24, 2013, 16:43 GMT

    @R_U_4_REAL_NICK The main reason England won in India was India was still rebuilding its test team and didn't know whom to play in which conditions. E.g. if Ravindra Jadeja had played in the Mumbai Test India would have soundly defeated England. Also Umesh Yadav got injured after first test and there was no reverse swing bowler known to the management to take advantage of the abrasive surface in Eden Gardens. I am pretty sure next time England come to India they are going to get a sound beating. P.S. India still is rebuilding its test team for overseas conditions though the test team for Indian conditions is more or less complete.

  • POSTED BY Leggie on | November 24, 2013, 16:23 GMT

    @Englishfan, I am seeing Carberry for the first time, and the first impression is that he lets the bowlers dominate and get themselves into a nice rhythm. Surprisingly I did not see any intent to score runs. Not sure if this is how he bats, or just that he was being over cautious in *this* match. To fight the Aussies, I believe one has to be in a positive frame of mind and that mind set must start right from the start. So, IMHO Carberry must give way to someone who is a little more positive... OR Carberry himself has to open up a bit.

  • POSTED BY CodandChips on | November 24, 2013, 15:45 GMT

    @Andrew Dixon I love Carberry, especially as a hampshire fan. I hope he has a great ashes. But Joe Root is the future, and this is a perfect opportunity for him to have a go.

    On Anderson he needs a rest and I see WI as an opportunity to have a look at the likes of Jordan. I would still pick him when Sri Lanka and India are here, unless his form is woeful.

  • POSTED BY R_U_4_REAL_NICK on | November 24, 2013, 15:35 GMT

    The difference in Ahmedabad was that for some bizarre reasoning only known to ECB, England tried to play with only one spinner. Would I be right in saying that once they wised up, and played two spinners like every other international team does in subcontinent, the wins came?

    This game and indeed series is different. I don't think there's much more England can do team wise. Even the most avid England fans knew Swann was/is going to struggle this series and must find a way to contain better. Australia have out-batted, out-bowled, out-fielded and out-strategized England this game, but surely we should wait and see if they can do that a few more times before thumping the keyboards and calling for heads to roll.

  • POSTED BY on | November 24, 2013, 15:26 GMT

    @ Samar - He bowls to the left, he bowls to the right, but when he bowls to the centre, lets just enjoy England's plight.

  • POSTED BY on | November 24, 2013, 15:11 GMT

    Englishfan, why the hell would you not give your new opener more of a chance, he looked okay, was unlucky in the second dig. And seriously your going to drop anderson, hes been your best bowler for years and still is. And yes your dropping him not resting him.

  • POSTED BY on | November 24, 2013, 15:08 GMT

    The best spinner England have ever had was Derek Underwood not Swann. Even when he was not taking wickets he was deadly accurate. Although in 1975-76 tour of India, it was England seamers who collectively did the damage, the constant pressure exerted by Underwood who was the highest wicket taker in that series which paved way for 3-1 series win.

  • POSTED BY SurlyCynic on | November 24, 2013, 14:54 GMT

    The article says that England have 'only played two tests on quick wickets in the last 4 years' - what about the Wanderers? England were comprehensively beaten there and players like Trott struggled with pace. Sounds familiar.

  • POSTED BY CodandChips on | November 24, 2013, 14:45 GMT

    We need a transition, like the one India went through. Personally I feel it should come after the ashes, in the West Indies tour. Our batsmen are all in decline.

    For the WI I would rest Anderson, drop Trott and Prior and forget about Rankin and Tremlett (unless any of these 4 play extremely well this Ashes).I would pick the following: 1.Cook 2. Root 3.Bell 4.KP 5.Balance 6.Taylor 7.Davies (wk)8. Broad 9.Jordan 10.Swann 11.Finn. Reserves Chopra Moeen Bairstow Kerrigan Woakes (unless Stokes plays well here) Onions.

    And I'd try and have a look at everybody listed, if not in WI ,at home to Sri Lanka.

  • POSTED BY on | November 24, 2013, 14:40 GMT

    He bowls to the left, he bowls to the right. wonder what the barmy army has to add now when he is bowling to the centre.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • POSTED BY on | November 24, 2013, 14:40 GMT

    He bowls to the left, he bowls to the right. wonder what the barmy army has to add now when he is bowling to the centre.

  • POSTED BY CodandChips on | November 24, 2013, 14:45 GMT

    We need a transition, like the one India went through. Personally I feel it should come after the ashes, in the West Indies tour. Our batsmen are all in decline.

    For the WI I would rest Anderson, drop Trott and Prior and forget about Rankin and Tremlett (unless any of these 4 play extremely well this Ashes).I would pick the following: 1.Cook 2. Root 3.Bell 4.KP 5.Balance 6.Taylor 7.Davies (wk)8. Broad 9.Jordan 10.Swann 11.Finn. Reserves Chopra Moeen Bairstow Kerrigan Woakes (unless Stokes plays well here) Onions.

    And I'd try and have a look at everybody listed, if not in WI ,at home to Sri Lanka.

  • POSTED BY SurlyCynic on | November 24, 2013, 14:54 GMT

    The article says that England have 'only played two tests on quick wickets in the last 4 years' - what about the Wanderers? England were comprehensively beaten there and players like Trott struggled with pace. Sounds familiar.

  • POSTED BY on | November 24, 2013, 15:08 GMT

    The best spinner England have ever had was Derek Underwood not Swann. Even when he was not taking wickets he was deadly accurate. Although in 1975-76 tour of India, it was England seamers who collectively did the damage, the constant pressure exerted by Underwood who was the highest wicket taker in that series which paved way for 3-1 series win.

  • POSTED BY on | November 24, 2013, 15:11 GMT

    Englishfan, why the hell would you not give your new opener more of a chance, he looked okay, was unlucky in the second dig. And seriously your going to drop anderson, hes been your best bowler for years and still is. And yes your dropping him not resting him.

  • POSTED BY on | November 24, 2013, 15:26 GMT

    @ Samar - He bowls to the left, he bowls to the right, but when he bowls to the centre, lets just enjoy England's plight.

  • POSTED BY R_U_4_REAL_NICK on | November 24, 2013, 15:35 GMT

    The difference in Ahmedabad was that for some bizarre reasoning only known to ECB, England tried to play with only one spinner. Would I be right in saying that once they wised up, and played two spinners like every other international team does in subcontinent, the wins came?

    This game and indeed series is different. I don't think there's much more England can do team wise. Even the most avid England fans knew Swann was/is going to struggle this series and must find a way to contain better. Australia have out-batted, out-bowled, out-fielded and out-strategized England this game, but surely we should wait and see if they can do that a few more times before thumping the keyboards and calling for heads to roll.

  • POSTED BY CodandChips on | November 24, 2013, 15:45 GMT

    @Andrew Dixon I love Carberry, especially as a hampshire fan. I hope he has a great ashes. But Joe Root is the future, and this is a perfect opportunity for him to have a go.

    On Anderson he needs a rest and I see WI as an opportunity to have a look at the likes of Jordan. I would still pick him when Sri Lanka and India are here, unless his form is woeful.

  • POSTED BY Leggie on | November 24, 2013, 16:23 GMT

    @Englishfan, I am seeing Carberry for the first time, and the first impression is that he lets the bowlers dominate and get themselves into a nice rhythm. Surprisingly I did not see any intent to score runs. Not sure if this is how he bats, or just that he was being over cautious in *this* match. To fight the Aussies, I believe one has to be in a positive frame of mind and that mind set must start right from the start. So, IMHO Carberry must give way to someone who is a little more positive... OR Carberry himself has to open up a bit.

  • POSTED BY SamRoy on | November 24, 2013, 16:43 GMT

    @R_U_4_REAL_NICK The main reason England won in India was India was still rebuilding its test team and didn't know whom to play in which conditions. E.g. if Ravindra Jadeja had played in the Mumbai Test India would have soundly defeated England. Also Umesh Yadav got injured after first test and there was no reverse swing bowler known to the management to take advantage of the abrasive surface in Eden Gardens. I am pretty sure next time England come to India they are going to get a sound beating. P.S. India still is rebuilding its test team for overseas conditions though the test team for Indian conditions is more or less complete.