The Ashes 2013-14 January 5, 2014

Lehmann removed anxiety - Haddin

52

Australia's vice-captain Brad Haddin has credited coach Darren Lehmann with eliminating anxiety from the change room and allowing captain Michael Clarke to focus his attention on the on-field battle that led to Australia's Ashes clean sweep. Haddin, who also quashed retirement rumours, said all the "nervous energy" had disappeared from within the squad in the lead-up to this series, and this was a key factor in the triumph.

Prior to the first Test at the Gabba, Haddin said the previous coach Mickey Arthur had been "very, very insecure" in the role, which he believed had contributed to a poor atmosphere in the camp. After the 5-0 success was secured in Sydney, Haddin said the turnaround from the 3-0 defeat in England, when Lehmann had only just taken over on the eve of the series, had been in part down to the difference in feeling in the change rooms.

"I think Michael's always been an outstanding tactician," Haddin said. "He reads the game as well as anyone you can play with. I think what Darren and his staff have done is take the anxiety out of the change room. And all the nervous energy. We can just get on and do our job and Michael can do his without having to worry about anything else.

"I think our preparation was spot on. There was no anxiety leading in to the first Test. Everyone was relaxed and knew exactly where they stood. We knew what our team was a long way out, going in to this campaign, so we could prepare to play Test cricket, not look over our shoulders and worry about what was going on. We could prepare for this series and give it the respect it deserved. It was a massive test for us, that first Test match."

Haddin has epitomised the aggressive style of play the Australians have favoured in this series, his counterattacking with the bat rescuing the team from trouble in all five first innings. Attack has also been the key for the bowlers, with Mitchell Johnson's pace and accuracy making life uncomfortable for England's batsmen, while Ryan Harris and Peter Siddle never gave an inch.

"We've played the brand of cricket that Australians expect and that we expect as a group," Haddin said. "I think that's been pretty evident watching from the sideline. I've been ultra impressed with the way our fast bowlers have gone about it. There have been no places to hide. Once they've been five down it's been uncomfortable.

"And at times [it would have been] outright scary, trying to stand in front of these guys takes a lot of courage. From that point of view I'm happy with where it's all at. We're playing the Australian brand of cricket now. Darren and all his staff can take a lot of credit for that. We're getting back to enjoying our cricket and enjoying being Australians and playing our way."

Johnson was presented with the Compton-Miller Medal as Player of the Series but Haddin must have been strongly considered, given his outstanding work with bat and gloves throughout the campaign. In future it may appear surprising that Haddin did not even earn a Man of the Match award in any of the five Tests, but his contribution to the 5-0 result was incalculable.

It was all the more remarkable given that Haddin was not considered the first-choice wicketkeeper less than a year ago, when Matthew Wade was viewed as the long-term option behind the stumps. However, Haddin's return as vice-captain for the Ashes in England proved a shrewd move by the selectors - who included Arthur at the time - and he has shown that age is irrelevant to what a player can offer the team.

A few days ago, rumours began to circulate at the SCG that Haddin would bow out after the Sydney Test, content to end on the high of a 5-0 Ashes victory and spend more time with his family, including his daughter Mia, who is in remission from cancer. But Haddin said he had no retirement plans and still intended to play on until the 2015 World Cup, although he stopped short of saying he wanted to play in the next Ashes series in England later that year.

"I'm very clear where I want to go," he said. "I've said all along that I'd like to play along to the World Cup. From a cricket point of view I probably haven't played as much cricket as guys my age. A lot of guys my age would've played 250 first-class games. I'm enjoying it at the moment. As long as I'm still challenging myself and things are going in the right direction at home I'll play as long as I'm enjoying it and contributing to this team being the team we want to be.

"I'm 36, I can't hide behind the fact that that's my age. But from a cricket point of view I also started a lot later at Test cricket than most ... And I've had some time away from the game, so from that point of view I feel in a good place about my cricket. I'm enjoying being part of this team and what we're trying to create moving forward."

Brydon Coverdale is an assistant editor at ESPNcricinfo. He tweets here

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • SteveSinatra on January 7, 2014, 0:11 GMT

    Regarding the Australian batting selections for the upcoming tour to South Africa - Bailey has to go. Bring back Phil Hughes who has been the form batsman in the domestic season and has previously done well as an opener in South Africa. Put Rogers in at No.3 to bolster the batting. put Watson down to 5 and Steve Smith down to 6 to bat with Brad Haddin. And for goodness sake Michael Clarke give Steve Smith a decent bowl as a leg spinner - he could be a match winner over there.

  • Matt.au on January 7, 2014, 0:04 GMT

    Thomas Cherian: I totally agree with what you said. Still, Buchanans' record as Aussie coach remains and it's unfair to bad mouth him post retirement.

    Warne isn't a fan of coaches. In fact he said,"aren't they the things that take you to the ground and back to the hotel?" Well, close enough to that anyway.

    I think he tolerates someone like Lehmann because if there is going to be a coach let the coach have some flexability and understanding.

    Someone that can look you in the eye and say "Mate, I'll support you and give you a fair go and I'll be understanding of some failure". "Having said that, I will send you back to Shield cricket and bring someone else in that's in form, if and when required"

    Warner, Rodgers, Hughes, Clarke, Watson, Smith, Haddin - simple as that.

  • mzm149 on January 6, 2014, 20:50 GMT

    I am wondering how pathetic Indian team must be who lost to England on doctored spin friendly home pitches. We all know how bad players of spin bowling English are generally.

  • ModernUmpiresPlz on January 6, 2014, 16:57 GMT

    @Diane The reason we want Watson at #6 are many. If Warner AND Rogers fail we don't want a guy in there who has only 2 options. Hit out and maybe make runs or maybe fail miserably, or try and hold the fort and definitely fail miserably. You want someone who can defend well, punish the bad ball, and rebuild the innings if required. He seems more vulnerable to the quicks than spin to me, so that makes #6 a better slot for him also, plus it further defines his role when he walks out as to whether he has freedom to launch an end of innings assault or tow the line for the remaining batsman who's gotten in.

    Not to mention simply that Watson at #6 would feel infinitely more comfortable than Bailey, who just isn't a test player. Even Watto's biggest hater will admit at least that.

    The only problem for Australia: We don't have a test #3 yet, except Clarke. Who is fine from #3-5. But you get the feeling the search will begin soon. Maybe we should make a Clarke clone without a bad back.

  • on January 6, 2014, 16:46 GMT

    Matt.au

    Buchanan had a team which was filled with world class players each and everyone of them. Buchanan we have seen what he has done post his role as the coach of aussies be it KKR or New Zealand who are finally doing better now that Pat is gone. I for one agree with Warne here about Buchanan and warne is a great reader of the game and a captain aussies missed. At the level these guys play a natural talented bunch like Warne and Mcgrath I dont see being inspired with Buchanan

  • Matt.au on January 6, 2014, 11:55 GMT

    Posted by AidanFX on (January 6, 2014, 3:49 GMT) I guess one thing that I find interesting is that Warne among others seems to be on the Leeman bandwagon. But it is Warne who refuses to give John Buchanan any credit for his time as coach of a successful team. Can any one explain to me who is more filled in with why this would be the case.

    I would think from reading various articles it relates to how each coach goes about it. Leheman has thrown out the spectacles on the end of the nose and cane stick pointing to a blackboard approach. He is the more, right arm over the shoulder, with a beer in the left hand and have a chat type of coach.

    Once the chat is over and a few promises made from both sides, I suspect Leheman delivers on his part and expects you to deliver on yours.

    I also think Warne feels nearly anyone could have coached the Aussie team he played with for the last part of his career. He probably feels Buchanan got a bit of a free ride which is probably unfair to Buchanan.

  • Kaka13 on January 6, 2014, 6:08 GMT

    I agree that Leheman did miracle after Micky removal, he understands the Australia team better and infuse confidence to continue play their brand of cricket. I remember similar case of Greg Chappel case in India when he tried to change the style and fiddle with techniques of styles likes of Sehewag and destroyed confidence. When we have players at Test level and they come to that level playing their own style and if u try to change it will not work.

  • ShutTheGate on January 6, 2014, 6:02 GMT

    @ Dianne Skinner - I disagree, for starters if we're one or two down for not many we don't want someone to attack at number 3, we want someone to steady the ship, build a partnership and avoid a collapse.

    I also think that Watson would score more runs when the ball is older. Simply put, he doesn't average anywhere what a world class number averages and many of his significant innings come in the second innings.

    Can you name a match where Watson made a ton in the first innings and set the game up for Australia? The number 3 has to do that at least occasionally.

  • LoungeChairCritic on January 6, 2014, 5:36 GMT

    Some of the Ozzi supporters who believe that none of the Indian batsmen would make the Oz top 6 mustn't have Foxtel. Dhawan, Pujara, Kohli and Rohit Sharma are class. They will all play over 100 tests and average over 45 at the end of their career's. Our batsmen are generally struggling to average over 40. India's strength is their batting and spin bowling (In certain conditions). Their fielding and fast bowling needs to improve. In saying that Mohammed Shami is a find who will do well on Ozzi pitches.

  • BobCo on January 6, 2014, 4:44 GMT

    What's with these comments about none of the Indian players making Australia's top six?! I'd put Pujara and Kohli (even with the attitude problems of youth) easily in front of Watson, Smith and Bailey as batsmen. And I don't see that changing in the future viz. Smith and Bailey. If Watson can work his head out, he'll be a world beater, but he hasn't managed it yet.

  • SteveSinatra on January 7, 2014, 0:11 GMT

    Regarding the Australian batting selections for the upcoming tour to South Africa - Bailey has to go. Bring back Phil Hughes who has been the form batsman in the domestic season and has previously done well as an opener in South Africa. Put Rogers in at No.3 to bolster the batting. put Watson down to 5 and Steve Smith down to 6 to bat with Brad Haddin. And for goodness sake Michael Clarke give Steve Smith a decent bowl as a leg spinner - he could be a match winner over there.

  • Matt.au on January 7, 2014, 0:04 GMT

    Thomas Cherian: I totally agree with what you said. Still, Buchanans' record as Aussie coach remains and it's unfair to bad mouth him post retirement.

    Warne isn't a fan of coaches. In fact he said,"aren't they the things that take you to the ground and back to the hotel?" Well, close enough to that anyway.

    I think he tolerates someone like Lehmann because if there is going to be a coach let the coach have some flexability and understanding.

    Someone that can look you in the eye and say "Mate, I'll support you and give you a fair go and I'll be understanding of some failure". "Having said that, I will send you back to Shield cricket and bring someone else in that's in form, if and when required"

    Warner, Rodgers, Hughes, Clarke, Watson, Smith, Haddin - simple as that.

  • mzm149 on January 6, 2014, 20:50 GMT

    I am wondering how pathetic Indian team must be who lost to England on doctored spin friendly home pitches. We all know how bad players of spin bowling English are generally.

  • ModernUmpiresPlz on January 6, 2014, 16:57 GMT

    @Diane The reason we want Watson at #6 are many. If Warner AND Rogers fail we don't want a guy in there who has only 2 options. Hit out and maybe make runs or maybe fail miserably, or try and hold the fort and definitely fail miserably. You want someone who can defend well, punish the bad ball, and rebuild the innings if required. He seems more vulnerable to the quicks than spin to me, so that makes #6 a better slot for him also, plus it further defines his role when he walks out as to whether he has freedom to launch an end of innings assault or tow the line for the remaining batsman who's gotten in.

    Not to mention simply that Watson at #6 would feel infinitely more comfortable than Bailey, who just isn't a test player. Even Watto's biggest hater will admit at least that.

    The only problem for Australia: We don't have a test #3 yet, except Clarke. Who is fine from #3-5. But you get the feeling the search will begin soon. Maybe we should make a Clarke clone without a bad back.

  • on January 6, 2014, 16:46 GMT

    Matt.au

    Buchanan had a team which was filled with world class players each and everyone of them. Buchanan we have seen what he has done post his role as the coach of aussies be it KKR or New Zealand who are finally doing better now that Pat is gone. I for one agree with Warne here about Buchanan and warne is a great reader of the game and a captain aussies missed. At the level these guys play a natural talented bunch like Warne and Mcgrath I dont see being inspired with Buchanan

  • Matt.au on January 6, 2014, 11:55 GMT

    Posted by AidanFX on (January 6, 2014, 3:49 GMT) I guess one thing that I find interesting is that Warne among others seems to be on the Leeman bandwagon. But it is Warne who refuses to give John Buchanan any credit for his time as coach of a successful team. Can any one explain to me who is more filled in with why this would be the case.

    I would think from reading various articles it relates to how each coach goes about it. Leheman has thrown out the spectacles on the end of the nose and cane stick pointing to a blackboard approach. He is the more, right arm over the shoulder, with a beer in the left hand and have a chat type of coach.

    Once the chat is over and a few promises made from both sides, I suspect Leheman delivers on his part and expects you to deliver on yours.

    I also think Warne feels nearly anyone could have coached the Aussie team he played with for the last part of his career. He probably feels Buchanan got a bit of a free ride which is probably unfair to Buchanan.

  • Kaka13 on January 6, 2014, 6:08 GMT

    I agree that Leheman did miracle after Micky removal, he understands the Australia team better and infuse confidence to continue play their brand of cricket. I remember similar case of Greg Chappel case in India when he tried to change the style and fiddle with techniques of styles likes of Sehewag and destroyed confidence. When we have players at Test level and they come to that level playing their own style and if u try to change it will not work.

  • ShutTheGate on January 6, 2014, 6:02 GMT

    @ Dianne Skinner - I disagree, for starters if we're one or two down for not many we don't want someone to attack at number 3, we want someone to steady the ship, build a partnership and avoid a collapse.

    I also think that Watson would score more runs when the ball is older. Simply put, he doesn't average anywhere what a world class number averages and many of his significant innings come in the second innings.

    Can you name a match where Watson made a ton in the first innings and set the game up for Australia? The number 3 has to do that at least occasionally.

  • LoungeChairCritic on January 6, 2014, 5:36 GMT

    Some of the Ozzi supporters who believe that none of the Indian batsmen would make the Oz top 6 mustn't have Foxtel. Dhawan, Pujara, Kohli and Rohit Sharma are class. They will all play over 100 tests and average over 45 at the end of their career's. Our batsmen are generally struggling to average over 40. India's strength is their batting and spin bowling (In certain conditions). Their fielding and fast bowling needs to improve. In saying that Mohammed Shami is a find who will do well on Ozzi pitches.

  • BobCo on January 6, 2014, 4:44 GMT

    What's with these comments about none of the Indian players making Australia's top six?! I'd put Pujara and Kohli (even with the attitude problems of youth) easily in front of Watson, Smith and Bailey as batsmen. And I don't see that changing in the future viz. Smith and Bailey. If Watson can work his head out, he'll be a world beater, but he hasn't managed it yet.

  • AidanFX on January 6, 2014, 3:49 GMT

    I guess one thing that I find interesting is that Warne among others seems to be on the Leeman bandwagon. But it is Warne who refuses to give John Buchanan any credit for his time as coach of a successful team. Can any one explain to me who is more filled in with why this would be the case.

  • on January 6, 2014, 2:15 GMT

    I think Aus will struggle in SA due to their batting being very suspect. SA is strong in both batting and bowling especially at home. In regards to India's performance in SA recently, it was a matter of flattering to deceive in Tests. Expectations were low from India, and they exceeded them, but when the opportunity to actually win the first Test presented itself, they lacked killer instinct. The second Test may have been saved, but as Dhoni said a couple of decisions hurt us..especially Kohli being given out when he has been in great form. But that is sports..

  • ShutTheGate on January 6, 2014, 1:53 GMT

    @ John Verdal, I agree with your selection but I would like to add that we should include Faulkner into the squad in case Watson breaks down.

    It's no wonder we have top order collapses when our number 3 averages 36 in test cricket. Both Rogers and Warner now average over 40 in tests, we have Clarke averaging over 50. Smith averages 36 but is improving, if we can find a number 3 who can contribute consistently to first innings totals and average over 40 then I think we'll be moving in the right direction.

  • NAP73 on January 6, 2014, 1:03 GMT

    The difference is top-order batting and maybe the toss winning. It will be SAF 1-0 (if not ruthless, as was the case in the first test in the very small 2-test series against India recently; SAF would have won easily but they lacked confidence) or 2-0 (if they are more aggressive). India (Kohli and his confident nature continues to impress me) was a nice warm-up for them and SAF should be clicking now. Yet another looming transition phase is about to start for Oz; I hope they manage it better than last time. P.S. I have always had doubts about Clarke's technique (bat-pad gap) early on; he has recently started to regularly match Ponting and Dravid's late-career weakness in that department.

  • on January 6, 2014, 0:30 GMT

    nice to see Haddin acknowledging the destabilisation that was present under arthurs. now the team can unite with a single purpose! Why are people still trying to get watson down to six? He would be wasted there..much better for aus style to keep attacking if warner or rogers miss. Hughes still for me has had too many chances..last night as captain with extra pressure how many runs did he score? My only problem with australian fielding (some superb catching yesterday) is their low strike rate hitting the stumps when a runout is on! other countries seem to hit more often..maybe more practice in this area? Another thing if the same fitness standards applied to harris that they seem to be applying to the younger brigade he would have spent this series on the sidelines..sometimes you have to play thru some pain how else do you achieve any match fitness? GREAT RESULT!

  • Blakey on January 6, 2014, 0:10 GMT

    @DC75, can't wait for India's top 6 to prove themselves next year! I agree with @frontfootlunge, none of the Indian players would make Australia's top 6, in Australia. Haddin's comments about the brand of cricket that Austtralian's play is one of the most pertinent factors for this current team. Under excessive pressure from outside Australia, predominantly, our test team faded under attempts to play without the natural aggression that is our halmark. We were then usurped at this aspect of our game by the indians, poms and saffas, in particular, and our form and direction sufferred accordingly. The current level of aggression is about where it needs to be for Australians to play good cricket, with the removal of some of the uglier moments.

  • Chris_P on January 6, 2014, 0:06 GMT

    @IAS2009, You do know we have won in the WI & Sri Lanka in the last 2 years, don't you? The Sri Lankan victory was something very few teams manage to do over there. This team, unlike many others, have the talent to do so.

  • LoungeChairCritic on January 5, 2014, 23:49 GMT

    @adrian thomas you don't have to be a great side to be number 1. England who were a good side over the past 5 years proved that. A number 3 ranking in my opinion is where we deserve to be at the momement. Although South Africa are a class team and deserve to be overwhelming favourites in Feb, we will go into the series with a lot of confidence and nothing to loose. Leheman and his support staff have lightened the mood in the dressing room and made the game fun again for the players. @Scott Stevens although I share your optimism in regards to our fast bowling depth, I am not as confident in regards to our bats. We do not have the same depth as we had 15 years ago. In saying that, I can see a lot of potential in Maxwell. Like Warner, you need to be brave to be different. Although I think Bailey should stay at 6 for the 1st test in SA, I do believe the "Big Show" will one day be a handy test cricketer. Hitting sixes over cover, playing ramp shots and switch hitting spinners takes skill.

  • Beertjie on January 5, 2014, 23:18 GMT

    @John Verdal on (January 5, 2014, 16:52 GMT), fully agree. They gave Bailey a go in part because of worries over Pup's fitness. He knows the set up and can always be called up to replace Pup at any time if the latter has to pull out. But to persist with him would be to carry a top 6 batsman in the hope that he can make the occasional contribution despite his manifold technical defects. Doolan needs a go now with Hughes as back up on tour. I am confident of neither, but as @ScottStevo on (January 5, 2014, 19:16 GMT) notes, promising younger players can be phased in as and when consistent quality performance dictates.

  • USIndianFan on January 5, 2014, 23:17 GMT

    It will be interesting to see how the Aussie's fare outside. Right now they seem to perform in Australia. Also, not sure how effective they will be if really challenged. England created their own bogey.

    The biggest difference has been Lehman. Changed the team and the roles. Made Clarke productive and doing what he does best. He leads what is given. He is not a leader to plan and put together teams. He does not seem to get the loyalty of his men. So when the going gets tough, this team may fragment.

    But for the time-being, they can perform...

  • on January 5, 2014, 22:17 GMT

    Haddin is a superstar! Well played, Brad!

  • DJRNZ on January 5, 2014, 21:56 GMT

    Not the best Aussie team by a long way but on their day this lot can beat anyone by the looks of it.... Looking forward to seeing how they go in SA.

  • on January 5, 2014, 21:01 GMT

    Australia have some good young players: cummins, bird, pattinson, starc, whiteman, silk, doolan, m.marsh, hughes, fergusson. we have got two quality u19 batsmen ben McDermott and jake doran who should play shield cricket this season.

  • Chris_P on January 5, 2014, 20:44 GMT

    @ Adrian Thomas. Seeing as you apparently know little about Aussie cricket, let me update you. Yep, Harris is 34, but in Pattinson we have someone 10 years younger, just as quick, if not quicker & the same abilities as Harris. In Cummins, at 20 years of age, we have someone who is FAR quicker than Johnson & has already distroyed a South African batting line-up as an 18yo. Mitch Starc is only 23, left hand 145 kph swing bowler of both new & reverse. Bird, Hazelwood, & Faulkner have already played internationals & are clearly up to it, IMHO, at least on par with Siddle with potentially ready go go further. No, mate, quick bowling is not any problem. Batting is & needs a lot of work. There are players who deserve to get in ahead of Bailey, agree with Watson, Warner at home is spot on, not away (ex SA). Clarke? Really? The leading test run scorer of the past 2 years? Shrugs, if that is what you think, your entitled to an opinion.

  • Chris_P on January 5, 2014, 20:35 GMT

    @one-down . Yep, @Rajnal's selective memory loss of England beating India in India is pretty common with a few of his countrymen, all too keen to put the boot into England but seemingly forgetting the same team beat them at home & against the new breed. Their lack of cricket understanding stands out & it's easy to see they haven't played comepetitive cricket to have any idea about the intricacies of the game. Cheers.

  • on January 5, 2014, 20:33 GMT

    @ScottStevo yeah fair comment mate we've been smacked 5-0 and deservedly so. Mitch was utterly fantastic, and it was test cricket at its best and most frightening. It's thrilling to watch - at a distance greater than 22 yards! Having said that none of the names you mention scare me too much - except Pat Cummins who I saw rough up none other than Kallis not so long ago. I hope he comes back as fit, if not fitter after his lay off. The other 2 bowlers are good, sharp, but not MJ sharp. The 2 keepers you mention are no Haddins either. But I'm not so sure our cupboard is too full either. And hey I'm not hoping that Aus have no subs . When Aus cricket is strong world cricket is the richer. Good luck!

  • DJRNZ on January 5, 2014, 20:32 GMT

    Can't wait for the Aussie / SA series. Aussie has a great attack at the moment with Lyon being in the only weak link but even he is pretty handy. My money is on SA but will be close.

  • Chris_P on January 5, 2014, 20:31 GMT

    @Cpt.Meanster. FYI, Haddin was in Australia when the homework stuff came out, he was called in for the 3rd test when Wade was injured. Give the guy some credit, he took a year out of the game to attend his cancer stricken 2 yo daughter, something very few of us would ever hope to manage or contemplate .Since his return, I would suggest any pressure he faces in test cricket would be minimal compared to what he had endured during his daughter's illness.

  • ScottStevo on January 5, 2014, 19:16 GMT

    @Adrian Thomas, Harris has played 9 in a row and looks fit enough. He'll play in SA then needs an op. He may have a few years. Mitch is fitter than ever and has a few years left. Our young quicks oddly all got injured at the same time, but they are v good. Pattinson, Starc and Cummins all look the real deal. With the first 2 also averaging 30 with the bat! In the batting we have Hughes, who I still have high hopes for, we also have guys like C Ferguson, Burns and Doolan all late 20s and younger guys like Silk and Maddinson coming through. We have Paine and possibly Wade with the gloves and another young lad doing well with the bat. If Aus manage these players better than Arthur and co were doing, Aus can phase these guys in over the next few years and remain very strong. I think those expecting (hoping) Aus not to have decent replacements are clutching at straws. Also, we don't care right now as we just humped Eng 5-0!

  • on January 5, 2014, 17:59 GMT

    So the Aussies set for no.1? Mmmm... with whom exactly? Harris (aged 34)? It will take him months to recover from that - if he ever does. MJ (32)? He won't be bowling at 150 ks for too much longer. Siddle? Great back-up bowler, but not your main man. The fast boys waiting in the wings all appear to be injured. Batting: best one was Rogers (36). Warner is hit or miss (he hit this time). So too Watson, of the huge front pad. Clarke? I can see mistakes creeping in. Bailey? One day slogger, no test player. The only guy I can see from the current top 6 to be there in 3 years time is Smith. He looks good. The top 6 failed 5 times out of 5 in the first innings. Repaired by? Haddin (36). Aus moulded as a team fantastically well and that's the reason why we got a well deserved thrashing. They all peaked at once. Will they ever do it again?

  • IAS2009 on January 5, 2014, 17:27 GMT

    It is good Aussies won the ashes at home, i don't think this team can win over seas yet but it is good start, batting is very fragile i think, constantly England have them for down for very low score but could not capitalize on it. this might not happen overseas, Aussies were prepared and have plan for England, England players gong through motions, Trott and Swan departure did not help either. Congrat to Aussies.

  • on January 5, 2014, 16:52 GMT

    Australia need to make just one change against south Africa. pick alex doolan at no 3 and drop bailey. Watson should bat at no 6. Jackson bird and james pattinson should be included in squad. phil hughes can also be included as backup batsman.

  • Front-Foot-Lunge-Needs-A-Kiss on January 5, 2014, 16:11 GMT

    SA will be the real test. But I think the Aussies can pull it off if their batting picks up a bit

  • on January 5, 2014, 15:31 GMT

    Australia have played beautifully and have protected the brand of cricket that has been in the blood of the aussie cricketers for a long time.England have been totally demoralised,why not by the sheer pace of johnson,the accuracy of harris and siddle and the spin and boune of lyon.I would not want to take any credit away from the batsmen as warner and rogers have been the standout in this tour as far as batting has been concerned.I would just like to say that let this win not become a hurdle of headweight to the aussies and let them stay on the ground becouse we will have to see how they perform against steyn morkel and co. where the indians have come back after playing beautifully.Keep up the good brand of cricket and best of luck aussies!!

  • Jeeves_ on January 5, 2014, 15:04 GMT

    Well done to Haddin; he has shown great character. England were so woeful, it's hard to know what to do. Dismantle the whole team? Remove all the coaching staff? Other than Stokes and Broad, was there a single positive from this tour?

  • Iceman29 on January 5, 2014, 14:41 GMT

    @Front-Foot-Lunge-Needs-A-Hug: there's not a single player in the Indian team that would make this Australian 11" ohoh..slow down buddy...one series win and you talk as if your team is the best...let Aus team prove their worth in SA and in subcontinent and then lets see if any Aus player will make it to the Ind playing 11...peace

  • on January 5, 2014, 14:37 GMT

    congratulations are in order folks well played Aussies .Question is will they reproduce the same form against Morkel,Steyn and Philander.As the Indians will tell you after their awesome performance during the recently concluded test series .The three bowlers in question will not low the Aussies to bounce back being 5 down 3 times like the Poms did.Aussie Top order is prone to collapse as seen in the series and the Proteas wont give a second chance if they sniff blood .Best of luck though to our Australian supporters from a fan of the No1 ODI team and No2 test and T20 team cheers and god bless

  • DC75 on January 5, 2014, 14:28 GMT

    @Front-Foot-Lunge-Needs-A-Hug, I think you do not watch cricket, the Indian top six will get selected over the Australian top six anyday (maybe except for Clarke) - don't kid yourself, you are yet to face Steyn and company in SA and come out alive, SA batting line up is not English in nature - they can cope a lot better than English and it will be hard work for Johnson and company in their home conditions

  • gwoshmii on January 5, 2014, 14:18 GMT

    Fair go Front-Foot-Lunge-Needs-A-Hug - I'm Australian and I think Kohli or Pujara wouldn't go astray in our top six.

    Great work in this series but our top order needs a bit of work. SA will show us where we're at.

  • on January 5, 2014, 14:18 GMT

    Calm down guys, Haddin is no where near to Dhoni. Truth is always bitter, please follow the stats and it may become hard to Australians to accept it.. And moreover we Indians agree that we do prefer to play in subcontinent pitches which suites to our style of cricket and you people won't prepare rank turner pitches when we do play there.. Every team wants to play to there strengths and no home team wants to lose matches in there own backyard.. Looks like these days all test playing teams can win only in home conditions..

  • one-down on January 5, 2014, 13:33 GMT

    @Wasim_Wasamadroota: Thank you very much for stating the obvious... not many posters are able to understand this... for them it is indeed a case of sour grapes! When not many experts gave the Aussies much hope at the beginning of this series; they were proven wrong. As you have so rightly put it, it is indeed a throw-back to those days when fast bowlers ruled the earth! Every man played his part... they came together perfectly as a team AND the fast bowlers hunted as a pack... with Lyon being the perfect foil. The English may have had the 3 lions on their caps & shirts; but their lions were no match for our Lyon :) Now, there is talk of what will happen to our cricketers when they visit SA... I bet Graeme Smith's fingers remember the last time they met Johnson! SA has always been good on paper but when they come up against Australia they somehow manage to find a way to come second best :)

  • Wasim_Wasamadroota on January 5, 2014, 12:51 GMT

    Regardless of results Australia is THE only test team that consistently scores at over 3 runs per over and has the courage the chance losing to win a game. This has been one of the best displays of fast bowling, captaincy and attacking cricket that you will ever want to see. To see accomplished batsmen jumping, flinching and fending balls away from the throat was a throw back to the great cricket days.

  • Jugg3rNAuts on January 5, 2014, 12:48 GMT

    Ok so thats it good cricket by Australian team am not from Australia but i love their cricket always free from politics unlike other teams and they are a strong unit calling them home winners is not good this tag should remain only to one and only india and also england is no where near the skills of aussies

  • Front-Foot-Lunge-Needs-A-Hug on January 5, 2014, 12:26 GMT

    @Ajanthan Shantiratnam, we set England 500+ 3 times in a row and you don't think we dominated the batting? 10 tons to 1? Why do you guys who criticise Ashes cricket come here to post such garbage, just don't watch it. @Rajnal, there's not a single player in the Indian team that would make this Australian 11 so what are you doing here talking about 'pathetic cricket' for? We just flogged England 5-0, is that pathetic?

  • on January 5, 2014, 12:22 GMT

    @rajnal its the same with any team. have you seen the away records of every sub contient team. one series victory over teams like a weakend australia in their home conditions and series wins against west indies on the most one sided pitches in international crickets and suddenly they are the greatest team to ever walk the earth.

  • one-down on January 5, 2014, 11:51 GMT

    @Rajnal: "looks like these days all test playing teams can win only in home conditions" I cannot agree with you on this... you mean most teams... because the Indian team did not manage to win when they played England at home!!! :):):) Perhaps it would be wise to do some research prior to making inane comments? Thank you...

  • Rajnal on January 5, 2014, 11:14 GMT

    Oh so ! Aus is upbeat after one series win in home conditions , looks like these days all test playing teams can win only in home conditions, pathetic cricket

  • BradmanBestEver on January 5, 2014, 10:25 GMT

    Aussies well on top of England in the cricket - normal service has resumed after a few years of abnormal cricketing relations between the two countries

  • on January 5, 2014, 10:13 GMT

    When things go right it's common lot of credit is passed on to different people. None of the matches had Australian batting dominate the results like the previous era of AUS. It was more of a ENG batting failure than a full proof AUS performance. We never saw that 500pluz scores! Lehman has a lot of work in hand ahead of SA tour!

  • chicko1983 on January 5, 2014, 10:08 GMT

    Stay on haddin, defend the ashes in 2015 then bow out. Pfft, I shudder to think that poms rated prior better to you before this series, despite you averaging more with the bat and more dismissals in Ashes before this series started. You only stretched the gap this series and prior probably won't play a test again! We'll done mate

  • Cpt.Meanster on January 5, 2014, 10:03 GMT

    Yup Haddin, you can say whatever you want now because you won. I remember you struggling to put out words back in India during homework gate and in England. So it all seems rosy when you are winning. It's your time to come on top, England's to go down. The cycle will continue and the inevitable will surely happen.

  • Lalindra2012 on January 5, 2014, 9:58 GMT

    #I wish Sri Lanka had a local coach like this apart from Chandika Haththurusinghe...!

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • Lalindra2012 on January 5, 2014, 9:58 GMT

    #I wish Sri Lanka had a local coach like this apart from Chandika Haththurusinghe...!

  • Cpt.Meanster on January 5, 2014, 10:03 GMT

    Yup Haddin, you can say whatever you want now because you won. I remember you struggling to put out words back in India during homework gate and in England. So it all seems rosy when you are winning. It's your time to come on top, England's to go down. The cycle will continue and the inevitable will surely happen.

  • chicko1983 on January 5, 2014, 10:08 GMT

    Stay on haddin, defend the ashes in 2015 then bow out. Pfft, I shudder to think that poms rated prior better to you before this series, despite you averaging more with the bat and more dismissals in Ashes before this series started. You only stretched the gap this series and prior probably won't play a test again! We'll done mate

  • on January 5, 2014, 10:13 GMT

    When things go right it's common lot of credit is passed on to different people. None of the matches had Australian batting dominate the results like the previous era of AUS. It was more of a ENG batting failure than a full proof AUS performance. We never saw that 500pluz scores! Lehman has a lot of work in hand ahead of SA tour!

  • BradmanBestEver on January 5, 2014, 10:25 GMT

    Aussies well on top of England in the cricket - normal service has resumed after a few years of abnormal cricketing relations between the two countries

  • Rajnal on January 5, 2014, 11:14 GMT

    Oh so ! Aus is upbeat after one series win in home conditions , looks like these days all test playing teams can win only in home conditions, pathetic cricket

  • one-down on January 5, 2014, 11:51 GMT

    @Rajnal: "looks like these days all test playing teams can win only in home conditions" I cannot agree with you on this... you mean most teams... because the Indian team did not manage to win when they played England at home!!! :):):) Perhaps it would be wise to do some research prior to making inane comments? Thank you...

  • on January 5, 2014, 12:22 GMT

    @rajnal its the same with any team. have you seen the away records of every sub contient team. one series victory over teams like a weakend australia in their home conditions and series wins against west indies on the most one sided pitches in international crickets and suddenly they are the greatest team to ever walk the earth.

  • Front-Foot-Lunge-Needs-A-Hug on January 5, 2014, 12:26 GMT

    @Ajanthan Shantiratnam, we set England 500+ 3 times in a row and you don't think we dominated the batting? 10 tons to 1? Why do you guys who criticise Ashes cricket come here to post such garbage, just don't watch it. @Rajnal, there's not a single player in the Indian team that would make this Australian 11 so what are you doing here talking about 'pathetic cricket' for? We just flogged England 5-0, is that pathetic?

  • Jugg3rNAuts on January 5, 2014, 12:48 GMT

    Ok so thats it good cricket by Australian team am not from Australia but i love their cricket always free from politics unlike other teams and they are a strong unit calling them home winners is not good this tag should remain only to one and only india and also england is no where near the skills of aussies