'The first morning, the first ball even, can set the tone'

It's the first day of the 2013 Ashes and Glenn McGrath, a man with plenty of experience of days like this, writes in the Guardian about how "the first morning, the first ball even, can set the tone" for the series.

Standing at the end of your run with the ball in your hand preparing to bowl the first ball of an Ashes series is an amazing feeling. The umpire calls play. The crowd roars (well, unless you're at Lord's). You let it build up. The opening batsman takes strike, he's looking down the track, waiting for you to run in. I liked to drag it out for another 15 or 20 seconds, just let it build and build. Then off you go …

And history shows that the first morning, the first ball even, can set the tone. Look at the 2005 series. Even though Australia won that first Test at Lord's, England had a lot more intent, were playing with a lot more confidence and you could tell from the way they bowled on the morning of the first day, especially the way Steve Harmison bowled. He was aggressive and got stuck into our top order - Ricky Ponting was hit, Justin Langer was hit, Matthew Hayden was hit. From day one we knew they meant business.

In the Telegraph, Alan Tyers laments the disappearance of sledgers, especially since the Australians never held back during their decades of Ashes dominance.

Whether it was Graeme Hick being told to "turn the bat over, the instructions are on the other side" or Ian Bell being derided as the "Shermanator" (after a weedy ginger loser in the American Pie film series), England's Ashes hopefuls seemed forever on the wrong end of not just the results but the repartee as well.

Facing an Australian top six that could include such 'luminaries' as Phil Hughes, Ed Cowan and Steve Smith, do England not owe it to the crushed Crawleys and humiliated Hicks of recent history to even things up a bit?

Greg Baum, in the Sydney Morning Herald, says the contest will be a defining one for the captains Alastair Cook and Michael Clarke, who are leading for the first time in an Ashes series.

This is England versus Australia, and it is Cook versus Clarke. That was apparent even in the visuals on Tuesday. Clarke, so often accused of airs and graces, was - and always is - the Sydney western suburbs boy, captaining Australia. His hair looked as more mown than cut, and his drawl was made more pronounced by the various English accents of his interlocutors. Cook was what he always is, Mr Darcy in creams, speaker of languages and player of instruments, tall and dark, and you knew that if he took off that daft sponsor's cap, a curl would fall across his forehead.

In the Telegraph, Derek Pringle outlines the differences between Cook and Clarke as captains.

In an age where sport teams tend to ape each other in both play and preparation, onlookers are in for a treat, as these two cut contrasting figures as leaders. Cook, who succeeded Andrew Strauss as England's Test captain last autumn, has inherited many of his predecessor's ways, caution being the main one while Clarke is a charismatic captain inspired by taking risks.

Allan Border, in the Daily Telegraph says Clarke has mastered two facets of captaincy but the third one remains a work in progress.

The two hardest parts are performing as a batsman and being a shrewd on-field tactician and he gets a double tick for both. The third one, being an off-field leader, is the easiest of the three, but the one that remains a work in progress. I can't blame him for taking time to get this one right. I was exactly the same, but the time has come for Michael to take firm control of the side.

"This could be a closer contest than many people with their whitewashes clearly believe. Some of the talk has been bombastic," writes Mike Selvey in the Guardian. "Michael Clarke's side may notionally be the "worst Australian team to visit these shores" but then we have heard that one before, to England's cost."

"The leading indicator of the Test is likeliest to be the fortunes of James Anderson, for whom this is a hunting ground happy to the point of euphoria: thirty-three wickets in five Tests," says Gideon Haigh in the Australian. "If his away curve achieves its usual voluptuous shape, England will be red-hot favourites; if it for some reason does not, Australia will feel a liberating relief."

Andrew Mueller, an Australian expat in England, tells of his anticipation of this Ashes series in the Telegraph.

As England fans with memories longer than four years will be aware, it is not pleasant to anticipate an Ashes series in the brace position, but for an Australian, it is very difficult ... And I'd argue that some of Australia's robust modern self-image is rooted in the great team of the early Seventies, Ian Chappell's gang of cocky larrikins with Zapatista moustaches, their disdain for traditional English virtues exemplified by the terrifying fast bowler Jeff Thomson: "Stuff that stiff-upper-lip crap. Let's see how stiff it is when it's split." Those were the days.

In the Daily Mail, Nasser Hussain says, "A huge factor in this Ashes series is how England are going to handle the expectation of being favourites."

It's not something they've always dealt with very well -- witness the 0-0 draw in New Zealand earlier this year. Conversely, they seem to prefer the underdog status. Look at the way they fought back in India after losing the first Test. Everyone expects England to rock up to Trent Bridge this morning and kickstart some kind of summer-long procession. But, trust me, they're going to have bad days along the way and the fascination will be to see how they cope.