The disadvantage of consistency
A constant complaint about England's players is that they are too inconsistent
Mike Holmans
25-Feb-2013

Getty Images
The biggest difference for me between the 2009 Ashes and most recent editions of this long-running soap was that the Australian bowlers were never alarming. During the 90s and most of this decade, I usually had a reaction to a change of bowling. Either dread at what Warne or McGrath or Alderman or McDermott or Gillespie might do in the next few (or, in Warne's case, many) overs or relief that they were taking a rest and England's batsmen - or, more to the point, their supporters - could breathe somewhat more easily.
It's not that Ben Hilfenhaus or Peter Siddle are bad bowlers. Hilfenhaus is the nearest approach Australia have made to an Alderman-a-like in ages and Siddle can bustle in like a truck for hours of lung-bursting effort, but one never felt that they put batsmen in imminent danger of dismissal. Nathan Hauritz, Marcus North and Stuart Clark are usually competent at what they do, but rarely rise to incisiveness. And the bowler who had ripped through South African batting orders like so much tissue paper, Mitchell Johnson, only managed to bowl well in one innings of the fourth Test – if anything, his introduction to the attack was the signal for the batsmen to get their shovels out and start filling their boots.
But apart from remembering to give Hilfenhaus the new cherry and not put a spinner on until the shine was off the ball, Ricky Ponting's bowling changes were basically an exercise in working out whose turn it was next. Wickets would fall because whoever was on bowled enough good balls for the inevitable lapse in a batsman's concentration to prove fatal, but there was rarely a sense that any of the bowlers had the force with them.
England's bowlers, on the other hand, were wildly inconsistent. Though quite capable of sending down hours of dross, they also turned on the magic for the odd spell and a clutch of wickets disappeared in puffs of smoke (or, at The Oval, dust). At Lord's, Jimmy Anderson and Fred Flintoff got five-fors, and at The Oval Stuart Broad got one for real and Graeme Swann had a moral one - though the scorebook says that Michael Clarke was run-out, an entry of st Strauss b Swann would give a slightly more accurate picture of what happened. Australian bowlers only managed two five-wicket hauls, both at Headingley. Graham Onions managed a couple of very destructive spells, and even Steve Harmison came to the party on the last afternoon, rattling Mike Hussey's cage enough to get him to run Ponting out and then wiping up the tail in no time flat - a task at which Australia failed repeatedly. England's tail usually wagged as if a lifetime supply of dog food had been plonked down in front of them.
Strauss had a wider range of bowling styles available to him, but every change was a bit of a gamble because until they started sending them down, he had to guess which of them was going to bowl accurately, at the right pace or on the right length. Fortunately for England, he got it right when it mattered most.
Much has been made of Australian players dominating the series aggregates and averages, but the statistical table which really tells the story of these Ashes is the one showing the best innings strike-rates, which has Siddle's and Johnson's performances from Headingley at or near the top, followed by a swathe of Englishmen scything Australians down in every match bar Cardiff.
A constant complaint about England's players is that they are too inconsistent. On this evidence, English inconsistency which has deep troughs and soaring highs is preferable to Australian consistent competence.