Ashes 2013: Andy Flower gives his full backing to under-fire Stuart Broad over refusal to walk

The latest debate has been fuelled by Stuart Broad’s decision not to walk after being caught at slip in England’s second innings at Trent Bridge. Broad, on 37, went on to make 65, a difference of 28 which proved vital in a pulsating contest England won by 14 runs. The decision of the umpire Aleem Dar to give Broad not out was not reviewed by Australia because they had already used their two permitted referrals.

Andy Flower, England’s head coach, supported his player yesterday. “When I played cricket I didn’t walk if I’d edged it, so I’d be a hypocrite to say that all other players should walk,” he said. “Most players leave it to the umpires to make the decision and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that.”

When Flower was playing for Zimbabwe he was involved in a heated incident during a match with England 12 years ago. On 99, the England wicketkeeper James Foster went up for a catch but the appeal was turned down. Foster and Flower were involved in an ugly exchange of words.

That was a one-day international in Harare, not the heat of an Ashes  battle. Broad has been attracting singular criticism, although both Michael Clarke and Brad Haddin declined to walk in Australia’s second innings. Clarke asked for his decision to be reviewed after being given out, a decision which was upheld, and Haddin,  on what was the last ball of the match, was sent on his way only when technology proved that he had inside edged the ball.

Darren Lehmann, Australia’s coach, perhaps encapsulated the view of both teams. “It’s dealt with as far as I’m concerned,” he said. “ The DRS [Decision Review System] has improved the  decision-making process. Both sides have the same issues. We’ve got to get  better at using it, basically.”

View the original article here

Ashes 2013: The complete package - how James Anderson became England’s go-to man

It was clear at Nottingham that Anderson is Cook’s go-to man, the fast bowler he believes will produce a moment of inspiration or supreme skill when his team needs it most. Cook trusts Anderson implicitly. He knows he is the man who can make him look good as a supreme captain. Between the pair a field and plan  are set, Anderson bowls to them and they produce results. It sounds easy but consistently bowling to a plan is a talent very few bowlers possess.

And this is why I couldn’t give a damn about the rankings and who people think is the best. The table is a bit of fun but the conclusions the mathematicians reach are largely irrelevant. I am sure in their calculation Anderson gained more points for knocking over New Zealand’s top order in seamer-friendly conditions at Lord’s in May than for dismissing Australia’s lower order at a steaming-hot, pressure cooker Trent Bridge on Sunday. We know what was more valuable and all that is important is that James Anderson is British and he  continues to win games of cricket for England.

Of far greater interest is what actually makes Anderson the world-class performer he is. Fast bowlers need a number of assets and characteristics to compete in a game that is largely geared to favour batsmen. It is, for example, extremely advantageous for a fast bowler to be tall, fast and intimidating. Yet these are not the resources that stand out in Anderson’s profile. At 6ft 2in he is not small but many of England’s other bowlers – Stuart Broad, Steven Finn, Graham Onions, Chris Tremlett and Boyd Rankin – tower above the 30-year-old. Neither is he lethally quick. Anderson generally checks in at between  80 and 85 mph. He doesn’t snarl like Merv Hughes either.

Although Anderson is a wonderful athlete it is his personal rather than physical qualities that make him stand out. Cricket history states that the great Sydney Barnes was an unbelievably skilful bowler yet it is hard to believe he possessed greater qualities than Anderson.

Nowhere were Anderson’s skills highlighted more than during a Sky Sports Masterclass filmed last year. Now I thought I had pretty good control of a cricket ball but during this session Anderson was producing staggering precision – attention to detail I struggled to comprehend. The fact that he was able to control which way the new ball swung by a simple, last-minute movement of the wrist; that he could deliberately hit the seam of the ball on an intended side and also release the ball with the seam wobbling, a skill that means the ball could move either way, was breathtaking. It was fascinating and illuminating to watch a master showing and explaining his craft.

But a fast bowler would be ridiculed and hopelessly exposed if he did not have a big heart and an unbreakable desire. Bowling is an unbelievably tough job, especially in the climate the first Ashes Test was played in. Anderson will have pushed himself as hard as he did at Trent Bridge on numerous occasions in the past and had very little to show for his efforts. But the reason why you go through the tough, unrewarding days is because you believe that somewhere along the line you will get what you deserve, and Anderson received just that in Nottingham.

The lesson to be learnt for many aspiring young fast bowlers and coaches is that Anderson’s rise to the top has not happened overnight. I clearly remember him making his England debut in a one-day  international against Australia at the MCG in December 2002. The Ashes were already lost and England were on the wrong end of a mauling from  Adam Gilchrist and Ricky Ponting, who both scored hundreds in a total in excess of 300.

Anderson went for 46 in six overs but even then there seemed a spirit in him. He was not overawed by a huge crowd and great players. Gilchrist became his first international wicket when he bowled him for 124.

He then spent the next five years on the periphery of the Test side and with coaches trying to change his bowling action. I recall interviewing him at New Road, Worcester ,when he was at his most frustrated. We just sat talking bowling for an hour or so, and I take no credit for what has happened since.

At the time Anderson was obsessed with taking wickets and he chased them recklessly. To him they were all that counted. It was the only way he felt he would force his way in to the England side. I told him he was going about things the wrong way, and that what he should attempt to do was bowl consistently well and to trust the game. The number in the maiden column was just as important as the number in the wicket column. The aim should be to bowl with consistency so that even on a wicketless day he was still doing a job for the team. It is not a coincidence that Anderson now consistently concedes fewer than three runs per over, offering his captain control as well as a cutting edge.

As impressive as anything is his adaptability. As he proved this week he is a threat in any conditions and on any type of pitch. This is achieved through conventional or reverse swing, by subtle changes of pace and angles or by simple seam movement. Basically, he is the complete package.

The England team know what an asset they have and, when possible, will handle him like a Ming vase. Without him this Ashes series could take a different road to that many predicted.

View the original article here

Ashes 2013: Jimmy Anderson torments the Australians – and then delivers the final thrust

It would have, he said, “The Prado looking like some big American college building with sprinklers watering the grass in the bright Madrid summer morning...

“It would have had the change when you leave the green country behind at Alsasua; it would have had Burgos far across the plain and eating the cheese later up in the room; it would have had the boy taking the wicker-bound jugs of wine on the train as samples; his first trip to Madrid and opening them in enthusiasm and they all got drunk, including the pair of Guardia Civil; it should make clear the change in the country as you come down out of the mountains and into Valencia in the dusk on the train... It should have the smell of burnt powder and the smoke and the flash and the noise of the traca going off through the green leaves of the trees... and the mounted head of the bull Gitanillo had killed.”

That was Hemingway after watching a few bullfights. Heaven knows his exhilaration had he seen the English matador James Anderson deliver the moment of truth to Brad Haddin in the old Plaza de Toros otherwise known as Trent Bridge. That would surely have been grounds for a number of wicker-bound jugs of the good wine.

View the original article here

Ashes 2013: After a perfect start, the only problem is actually coming up with something to follow it...

In the long period of assessment and prediction before the first ball was bowled at Trent Bridge (the second greatest ground anyone?) it was  generally recognised that the upshot might depend chiefly on two factors. The first was whether England were as good as generally thought, not least by themselves, the second was whether Australia were as bad as they themselves might have feared.

Those questions went some way to being answered in Nottingham: maybe and definitely not. If England prevail at Lord’s for the second time in  succession, after failing to beat Australia there for 75 years until 2009, they will take a 2-0 lead in the series. Australia would need to win the next three to regain the Ashes.

But that is to leap too far ahead for now. What five days in Nottingham did, as if it needed to be done, was to place Test cricket in a showcase that could sit proudly alongside one holding the Crown Jewels.

At lunchtime on the final day, BBC’s Test Match Special was receiving messages from people who were listening to events unfold in some of the more unlikely places around the globe,  including China and the Arctic Circle, rapt as the game reached its dramatic conclusion. On all parts of Planet Cricket the match had been enthralling. The decision by the television rights holders, Sky, to establish a special Ashes channel is looking inspired.

If a marketing company had brainstormed a promotional tool for Test cricket, it could not have emerged with a match quite as constantly engrossing. One side gained an advantage only for the other to hang on in there and then the other sneaked ahead again. The tension, the to-ing and fro-ing, the ebbing and flowing endured over all 14 sessions for five days and 14 runs was the eventual margin. It was actually only the 11th closest in terms of runs in Ashes history but that hardly does it justice.

Perhaps still stunned by what he had witnessed, Andy Flower, England’s head coach, was more measured than might have been expected even from such a calm head. “Obviously they’d fought back brilliantly and it was a great game,” he said. “Well done to them for getting that close. But I always believed that we could create enough chances to win that game. It’s great for all of us to be involved in such a great Test and I’m sure it will be a great series one way or the other. It was a brilliant game to be involved in.”

England announced an unchanged squad of 13 yesterday for the Lord’s match but that does not make the  selection of the final XI any more straightforward. That too will probably be unchanged.

Although Steve Finn was disappointing at Trent Bridge, it would be odd to omit a Middlesex bowler on his home ground for either of the two northerners, Tim Bresnan or Graham Onions. Finn was stoutly defended by Flower for the two breakthrough wickets he took in Australia’s first innings but his struggle for length throughout the match was reflected in the fact that Alastair Cook, England’s captain, was so loathe to bowl him by the end.

Perhaps nobody should have been surprised. Finn has been out of form for much of the summer but a man of 6ft 8in in height whose chief weapon as a fast bowler is bounce was being expected to ply his trade on a low, slow, arid strip of turf. It was a big ask and if Lord’s is similar then someone who can churn out over after over aiming for the top of off stump may be a wiser option.

Flower also defended Stuart Broad’s decision not to walk of his own accord when he edged the ball in England’s second innings and was given not out. It was against the general flow of public if not player opinion but brutally candid. “When I played cricket I didn’t walk when I’d edged it so I’d be a hypocrite to say that all other players should walk,” he said. “Most players leave it to the umpires to make the decision and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that.”

It is pretty certain that the bowling attack will not stay the same throughout the two back-to-back series. England do not have an over-abundance of bowling reserves and Chris Tremlett, as he was three years ago, is being groomed for the trip Down Under this winter. If David Saker, the bowling coach and a huge fan of Tremlett, likes what he sees in the England nets in the next two days then he may be called to arms sooner.

Flower denied all knowledge of what the pitch at Lord’s may be like but it would be a surprise to turn up to find that it is anything other than bone dry, slow and likely to encourage both reverse swing and spin. England have made their bed and for now are wallowing in it.

View the original article here

James Lawton on the Ashes 2013: James Anderson torments the Australians – then delivers the final thrust

It would have, he said, “The Prado looking like some big American college building with sprinklers watering the grass in the bright Madrid summer morning...

“It would have had the change when you leave the green country behind at Alsasua; it would have had Burgos far across the plain and eating the cheese later up in the room; it would have had the boy taking the wicker-bound jugs of wine on the train as samples; his first trip to Madrid and opening them in enthusiasm and they all got drunk, including the pair of Guardia Civil; it should make clear the change in the country as you come down out of the mountains and into Valencia in the dusk on the train... It should have the smell of burnt powder and the smoke and the flash and the noise of the traca going off through the green leaves of the trees... and the mounted head of the bull Gitanillo had killed.”

That was Hemingway after watching a few bullfights. Heaven knows his exhilaration had he seen the English matador James Anderson deliver the moment of truth to Brad Haddin in the old Plaza de Toros otherwise known as Trent Bridge. That would surely have been grounds for a number of wicker-bound jugs of the good wine.

View the original article here

Ashes 2013: The complete package - how Jimmy Anderson became England’s go-to man

It was clear at Nottingham that Anderson is Cook’s go-to man, the fast bowler he believes will produce a moment of inspiration or supreme skill when his team needs it most. Cook trusts Anderson implicitly. He knows he is the man who can make him look good as a supreme captain. Between the pair a field and plan  are set, Anderson bowls to them and they produce results. It sounds easy but consistently bowling to a plan is a talent very few bowlers possess.

And this is why I couldn’t give a damn about the rankings and who people think is the best. The table is a bit of fun but the conclusions the mathematicians reach are largely irrelevant. I am sure in their calculation Anderson gained more points for knocking over New Zealand’s top order in seamer-friendly conditions at Lord’s in May than for dismissing Australia’s lower order at a steaming-hot, pressure cooker Trent Bridge on Sunday. We know what was more valuable and all that is important is that James Anderson is British and he  continues to win games of cricket for England.

Of far greater interest is what actually makes Anderson the world-class performer he is. Fast bowlers need a number of assets and characteristics to compete in a game that is largely geared to favour batsmen. It is, for example, extremely advantageous for a fast bowler to be tall, fast and intimidating. Yet these are not the resources that stand out in Anderson’s profile. At 6ft 2in he is not small but many of England’s other bowlers – Stuart Broad, Steven Finn, Graham Onions, Chris Tremlett and Boyd Rankin – tower above the 30-year-old. Neither is he lethally quick. Anderson generally checks in at between  80 and 85 mph. He doesn’t snarl like Merv Hughes either.

Although Anderson is a wonderful athlete it is his personal rather than physical qualities that make him stand out. Cricket history states that the great Sydney Barnes was an unbelievably skilful bowler yet it is hard to believe he possessed greater qualities than Anderson.

Nowhere were Anderson’s skills highlighted more than during a Sky Sports Masterclass filmed last year. Now I thought I had pretty good control of a cricket ball but during this session Anderson was producing staggering precision – attention to detail I struggled to comprehend. The fact that he was able to control which way the new ball swung by a simple, last-minute movement of the wrist; that he could deliberately hit the seam of the ball on an intended side and also release the ball with the seam wobbling, a skill that means the ball could move either way, was breathtaking. It was fascinating and illuminating to watch a master showing and explaining his craft.

But a fast bowler would be ridiculed and hopelessly exposed if he did not have a big heart and an unbreakable desire. Bowling is an unbelievably tough job, especially in the climate the first Ashes Test was played in. Anderson will have pushed himself as hard as he did at Trent Bridge on numerous occasions in the past and had very little to show for his efforts. But the reason why you go through the tough, unrewarding days is because you believe that somewhere along the line you will get what you deserve, and Anderson received just that in Nottingham.

The lesson to be learnt for many aspiring young fast bowlers and coaches is that Anderson’s rise to the top has not happened overnight. I clearly remember him making his England debut in a one-day  international against Australia at the MCG in December 2002. The Ashes were already lost and England were on the wrong end of a mauling from  Adam Gilchrist and Ricky Ponting, who both scored hundreds in a total in excess of 300.

Anderson went for 46 in six overs but even then there seemed a spirit in him. He was not overawed by a huge crowd and great players. Gilchrist became his first international wicket when he bowled him for 124.

He then spent the next five years on the periphery of the Test side and with coaches trying to change his bowling action. I recall interviewing him at New Road, Worcester ,when he was at his most frustrated. We just sat talking bowling for an hour or so, and I take no credit for what has happened since.

At the time Anderson was obsessed with taking wickets and he chased them recklessly. To him they were all that counted. It was the only way he felt he would force his way in to the England side. I told him he was going about things the wrong way, and that what he should attempt to do was bowl consistently well and to trust the game. The number in the maiden column was just as important as the number in the wicket column. The aim should be to bowl with consistency so that even on a wicketless day he was still doing a job for the team. It is not a coincidence that Anderson now consistently concedes fewer than three runs per over, offering his captain control as well as a cutting edge.

As impressive as anything is his adaptability. As he proved this week he is a threat in any conditions and on any type of pitch. This is achieved through conventional or reverse swing, by subtle changes of pace and angles or by simple seam movement. Basically, he is the complete package.

The England team know what an asset they have and, when possible, will handle him like a Ming vase. Without him this Ashes series could take a different road to that many predicted.

View the original article here

Ashes 2013: The complete package - how Anderson became England’s go-to man

It was clear at Nottingham that Anderson is Cook’s go-to man, the fast bowler he believes will produce a moment of inspiration or supreme skill when his team needs it most. Cook trusts Anderson implicitly. He knows he is the man who can make him look good as a supreme captain. Between the pair a field and plan  are set, Anderson bowls to them and they produce results. It sounds easy but consistently bowling to a plan is a talent very few bowlers possess.

And this is why I couldn’t give a damn about the rankings and who people think is the best. The table is a bit of fun but the conclusions the mathematicians reach are largely irrelevant. I am sure in their calculation Anderson gained more points for knocking over New Zealand’s top order in seamer-friendly conditions at Lord’s in May than for dismissing Australia’s lower order at a steaming-hot, pressure cooker Trent Bridge on Sunday. We know what was more valuable and all that is important is that James Anderson is British and he  continues to win games of cricket for England.

Of far greater interest is what actually makes Anderson the world-class performer he is. Fast bowlers need a number of assets and characteristics to compete in a game that is largely geared to favour batsmen. It is, for example, extremely advantageous for a fast bowler to be tall, fast and intimidating. Yet these are not the resources that stand out in Anderson’s profile. At 6ft 2in he is not small but many of England’s other bowlers – Stuart Broad, Steven Finn, Graham Onions, Chris Tremlett and Boyd Rankin – tower above the 30-year-old. Neither is he lethally quick. Anderson generally checks in at between  80 and 85 mph. He doesn’t snarl like Merv Hughes either.

Although Anderson is a wonderful athlete it is his personal rather than physical qualities that make him stand out. Cricket history states that the great Sydney Barnes was an unbelievably skilful bowler yet it is hard to believe he possessed greater qualities than Anderson.

Nowhere were Anderson’s skills highlighted more than during a Sky Sports Masterclass filmed last year. Now I thought I had pretty good control of a cricket ball but during this session Anderson was producing staggering precision – attention to detail I struggled to comprehend. The fact that he was able to control which way the new ball swung by a simple, last-minute movement of the wrist; that he could deliberately hit the seam of the ball on an intended side and also release the ball with the seam wobbling, a skill that means the ball could move either way, was breathtaking. It was fascinating and illuminating to watch a master showing and explaining his craft.

But a fast bowler would be ridiculed and hopelessly exposed if he did not have a big heart and an unbreakable desire. Bowling is an unbelievably tough job, especially in the climate the first Ashes Test was played in. Anderson will have pushed himself as hard as he did at Trent Bridge on numerous occasions in the past and had very little to show for his efforts. But the reason why you go through the tough, unrewarding days is because you believe that somewhere along the line you will get what you deserve, and Anderson received just that in Nottingham.

The lesson to be learnt for many aspiring young fast bowlers and coaches is that Anderson’s rise to the top has not happened overnight. I clearly remember him making his England debut in a one-day  international against Australia at the MCG in December 2002. The Ashes were already lost and England were on the wrong end of a mauling from  Adam Gilchrist and Ricky Ponting, who both scored hundreds in a total in excess of 300.

Anderson went for 46 in six overs but even then there seemed a spirit in him. He was not overawed by a huge crowd and great players. Gilchrist became his first international wicket when he bowled him for 124.

He then spent the next five years on the periphery of the Test side and with coaches trying to change his bowling action. I recall interviewing him at New Road, Worcester ,when he was at his most frustrated. We just sat talking bowling for an hour or so, and I take no credit for what has happened since.

At the time Anderson was obsessed with taking wickets and he chased them recklessly. To him they were all that counted. It was the only way he felt he would force his way in to the England side. I told him he was going about things the wrong way, and that what he should attempt to do was bowl consistently well and to trust the game. The number in the maiden column was just as important as the number in the wicket column. The aim should be to bowl with consistency so that even on a wicketless day he was still doing a job for the team. It is not a coincidence that Anderson now consistently concedes fewer than three runs per over, offering his captain control as well as a cutting edge.

As impressive as anything is his adaptability. As he proved this week he is a threat in any conditions and on any type of pitch. This is achieved through conventional or reverse swing, by subtle changes of pace and angles or by simple seam movement. Basically, he is the complete package.

The England team know what an asset they have and, when possible, will handle him like a Ming vase. Without him this Ashes series could take a different road to that many predicted.

View the original article here

Ashes 2013: Jimmy Anderson torments the Australians – then delivers the final thrust

It would have, he said, “The Prado looking like some big American college building with sprinklers watering the grass in the bright Madrid summer morning...

“It would have had the change when you leave the green country behind at Alsasua; it would have had Burgos far across the plain and eating the cheese later up in the room; it would have had the boy taking the wicker-bound jugs of wine on the train as samples; his first trip to Madrid and opening them in enthusiasm and they all got drunk, including the pair of Guardia Civil; it should make clear the change in the country as you come down out of the mountains and into Valencia in the dusk on the train... It should have the smell of burnt powder and the smoke and the flash and the noise of the traca going off through the green leaves of the trees... and the mounted head of the bull Gitanillo had killed.”

That was Hemingway after watching a few bullfights. Heaven knows his exhilaration had he seen the English matador James Anderson deliver the moment of truth to Brad Haddin in the old Plaza de Toros otherwise known as Trent Bridge. That would surely have been grounds for a number of wicker-bound jugs of the good wine.

View the original article here

Ashes 2013: England stick with same squad for second Test

Alastair Cook's team hung on yesterday for a famous 14-run win in a titanic first Test at Trent Bridge, and the selectors this morning confirmed the same 13 to pick from when the second starts at HQ on Thursday.

Cook and coach Andy Flower will then have tougher decisions to make about whether to again give Steven Finn the nod as their third seamer ahead of either Tim Bresnan or Graham Onions.

Finn struggled in Nottingham, where man of the match James Anderson led the home attack brilliantly and was rewarded with 10 wickets.

Announcing today's unchanged squad, national selector Geoff Miller congratulated Cook's England on the "composure" they demonstrated to keep Australia at bay on the final day.

"It was a fantastic start to the Investec Test series, with both sides showing a huge amount of skill and determination," he said.

"I would like to congratulate England on showing a great deal of composure to win by 14 runs."

Miller is expecting more of the same from both sides in the remaining four Tests.

"I have no doubt that the rest of the series will be equally compelling," he added.

"We have selected the same squad for the Lord's Test, because this continues to provide options for Alastair Cook and Andy Flower."0

England squad (v Australia at Lord's in the second Investec Test, starting on July 18):

AN Cook (capt), JE Root, IJL Trott, KP Pietersen, IR Bell, JM Bairstow, MJ Prior (wkt), TT Bresnan, SCJ Broad, GP Swann, JM Anderson, G Onions, ST Finn.

PA

View the original article here

Ian Bell on the Ashes 2013: Most of us just sat about eating Cornettos before that final session

I owed the team those runs. I’ve felt in good form all year, but I haven’t had the scores to show for it and I had a relatively disappointing year in 2012. I was flying in 2010 and 2011, but then I had a long lay-off ahead of going to the UAE and struggled against Saeed Ajmal, who is right up there among the toughest bowlers I’ve faced. Maybe I lost a bit of confidence as a result and it has taken a while to rediscover my best form.

It’s not as if I felt I had anything to prove. Maybe, if I had not enjoyed a good series in Australia in 2010-11, I might have felt that way. But I’ve had good innings before. I scored a century against India at Trent Bridge a couple of years ago that helped set up a victory and I’ve helped us fight for draws in Cape Town and Auckland. But, whatever the merits of other series, for anyone in England or Australia, the Ashes is always the biggest series you play so to contribute to a victory is a special feeling. It’s definitely the most important innings I’ve played in an Ashes match.

As a game it was up there with Edgbaston 2005 for drama. There were so many momentum swings; so much drama. From a personal perspective, it’s more satisfying to have played a large part in this result. When you look back on your career, you want to know you’ve scored your runs in the biggest games, under the most pressure. I did that at Trent Bridge.

I was at the other end when Stuart Broad survived ‘that’ appeal. I honestly didn’t know he had hit it and I’ve always thought Aleem Dar is an exceptional umpire. At the time I put the Australian reaction down to frustration. Broad didn’t mention the edge and I didn’t know about it until I saw a replay back in the dressing room. The fact is that almost no batsmen in world cricket ‘walk.’ It’s within everyone’s right to wait for the umpire’s decision and we have seen the batsmen of both sides do that in this game. I can’t see it causing any lingering problem between the teams.

You honestly don’t always know when you’ve edged it. I didn’t feel anything when I was out. I heard a nick, but I didn’t feel anything, and it was the same for Joe Root when he was caught down the legside. He heard something, but didn’t feel it and, had he reviewed, he may well have been successful. There was no sign of an edge on Hot Spot.

The Australian bowlers all like to have a chat - that’s a polite way of putting it - but, at this stage of my career, I barely even notice. Maybe, when I was younger, I wasn’t prepared for it, but now it just washes over me. I never respond. The whole purpose is to make you lose concentration so if you allow yourself to become distracted by it, you’re letting it affect your game.

We have a great bowler of our own these days. Jimmy Anderson’s career record might not show it - that can happen if you start your career early and learn your trade at the highest level - but he is well on his way to establishing himself as a great bowler. We’ve known for a few years that he was a match-winner in typical green, English conditions, but he has proved he is on dry, sub-continent style pitches where he gains reverse swing, too. I really can’t remember the last time he bowled badly with a red ball. He instils a sense of calm among the other bowlers and with his skill and fitness is a huge asset to us. I’m glad he’s on my team; I wouldn’t want to be facing him at this stage of his career.

It was pleasing to see how well he was supported in the field. Even in those last few minutes, Jonny Bairstow and I pulled off a couple of diving saves in the field that ensured we kept the batsmen under pressure. We made them fight for every run and in the end the pressure told.

We were amazingly calm. It can get very tense in those situations but, after lunch on the final day, most of us sat around eating Cornettos before going out for that final session.

Teams tend to work on remaining calm on the pitch and, in a way, that is easier as you have your job to do and you can lose yourself by concentrating on that. But it’s in the dressing room where things can become tense and, if that environment is wrong, other things fall apart. We were excellent in that respect at Trent Bridge. That bodes very well for us for the rest of the series. We know we’re going to be tested again and again, but we’re proved we can withstand that and come through it as the winning side.

To read Ian Bell’s columns in full thoughout the Ashes series, visit the leading cricket website espncricinfo.com

 

View the original article here

Ashes 2013: Umpires Aleem Dar and Kumar Dharmasena face rapid return to the front line

Two years ago, he might have been spared the ordeal of what he has just gone through in the first Test match between England and Australia  because he would have done things differently. He made two decisions, both of them not out, which had a monumental bearing on the match.

They were both wrong. First, he decided that Stuart Broad had not hit the ball in England’s second innings when the batsman was on 37. Slow-motion replays showed he had firmly edged it and Broad is still reaping the whirlwind for declining to own up and walk.

Dar’s lapse was forgivable, given the angle of Broad’s bat and the fact that the ball then crashed into the gloves of wicketkeeper Brad Haddin, perhaps blurring the original sound. Australia could not dispute it – or not officially, that is – because they had used up their allocation of reviews.

As the match reached its sapping climax, Dar ruled that Haddin had not touched a ball from Jimmy Anderson that swerved in at him. Perhaps he was influenced by England’s distinctly unconvincing appeal, perhaps he did not pick up the thin inside edge.

It is merely conjecture but perhaps he was also mindful of the fact that this was a decision on which the match and possibly the series depended. There may have been an unconscious thought that if England were sure, they could ask for a review. England did so and Dar had to alter his verdict. Thus did an epic Test match end in an early 21st-century way.

Dar and his fellow umpire, Kumar Dharmasena, his successor as ICC umpire of the year, were drained by the events of Trent Bridge. Doubtless, the third umpire, Marais Erasmus, felt similarly. It was a close game full of narrow decisions and reviews.

The evidence of Trent Bridge suggests that it is becoming increasingly difficult to make rulings. The decision review system is there to help but it also fuels the umpires’ doubts and  affects their self-esteem.

By far the vast majority of players accept that umpires can and do make errors and get on with the game. That does not make it any easier on these officials, however, and there were moments in Nottingham when Dar and Dharmasena looked like crumbling before our eyes.

Four men are juggling the three umpiring positions throughout this series and the one that follows in Australia, with the trio for the first Test being joined by Tony Hill of New Zealand. This is because the ICC elite panel of 12 now contains four Englishmen and four Australians, none of whom is permitted to stand in matches involving their sides. Elite matches deserve elite officials which leaves the ICC nowhere else to turn.

By January,  the officials will have had to contend with appeals spurious and genuine and reviews legitimate and politic. They will be tired men and along the way, like poor Dar in the past few days, they will be cast as villains.

Neutral, or independent, umpires were originally introduced to eradicate even the suspicion of prejudice based on national support. But elitism carries with it its own responsibilities (not to mention the scrutiny of the cameras). If the balance of the panel continues to be as it is a change of policy may be necessary.

Ashton Agar

On six, Agar appeared to have fallen just short before a stumping decision was reviewed. Third umpire Marais Erasmus saw things differently and Agar made 98.

Michael Clarke

Clarke was adjudged to have been caught behind, but the Australian saw things differently and sent the decision upstairs. The captain was rightly dismissed after a tiny nick showed up on the infra-red.

Stuart Broad

Broad stood still and silent after his thick edge was caught by Clarke at slip via Haddin’s gloves. The incensed tourists, however, had no remaining reviews.

Brad Haddin

Fittingly, the final wicket of Australia’s second innings was sent upstairs after suspicions of Haddin’s feathered inside edge. With 15 runs needed to win, captain Alastair Cook opted to gamble, and England took the Test.

View the original article here

Ashes 2013: Matt Prior - 'I asked Brad Haddin if he had edged it... he nodded'

Prior’s description of events also demonstrates how difficult it is for umpires to declare big, match-altering verdicts. In the second Test, starting at Lord’s tomorrow, the Decision Review System, and the Hot Spot camera in particular, will be the object of constant scrutiny.

With the match at Trent Bridge nearing a pulsating finale, Australia needed 15 runs to win with only one wicket in hand. The last wicket pair had put on 65 when Brad Haddin appeared to get a thin edge to a ball from Jimmy Anderson. Umpire Aleem Dar rejected England’s appeal, which was led by Prior but joined belatedly by Anderson.

“It was a strange one because you’re obviously hoping every ball for that final wicket. And then thankfully –  I knew he had hit it, or assumed he had hit it. I heard the noise and for a keeper it can be the faintest nick but it just changes the timing of when the ball hits your gloves. You can almost feel when a batter hits it.So when Jimmy hadn’t appealed I looked at Cooky [captain Alastair Cook] and he said, ‘He’s hit that, hasn’t he?’ and I said, ‘I think so, definitely’ and that’s when we  reviewed it. After we had reviewed it I actually turned to Hadds and said, ‘You’ve hit that, haven’t you?’ and he nodded. I was then hoping Hot Spot was going to work and we’d get over the line.”

Hot Spot did its business, albeit faintly, and England won an epic victory. Lest there still be any doubt, Haddin himself banished it forever by saying yesterday: “Yeah, I hit it. I knew I was out; it was obvious.”

Obvious to all but Dar, who turned down the appeal, aware that England still had reviews up their sleeve. It was the last decision in a match that seemed to contain a series of umpiring lapses, although the International Cricket Counci issued a statement yesterday to show that Dar and his colleague Kumar Dharmasena were more often right than wrong.

Between them the pair had to make a total of 72 decisions during the match, well above the average of 49 for a match in which DRS is being used.  They were assessed as having made seven errors, three of which went uncorrected. The percentage of correct decisions before reviews was 90.3 per cent, which rose to 95.8 per cent after the use of DRS. This was an increase of 5.5 per cent, which the ICC was clearly delighted to point out was the average increase from DRS Test matches in 2012-13.

The three uncorrected errors included the lbw decision against Jonathan Trott when Dar’s correct decision was overturned and two involving Stuart Broad, who was caught at slip and struck leg before but given not out on both occasions, with Australia having no reviews left.

David Richardson, the chief executive of the ICC, said: “With reverse swing and spin playing an important role, and the added intensity of the first Ashes Test, it was a difficult match to umpire. The umpires did a good job under difficult conditions. This reflects the calibre of umpires Dar, Dharmasena and [Marais] Erasmus, who have consistently performed at a high level.  Like the players, umpires can also have good and bad days but we all know that the umpire’s decision, right or wrong, is final and must be accepted.”

As for Prior, he has had a word with Anderson. “I’ve said to him, don’t ever not appeal again.”

Decision Review System: The difference

* A total of 72 decisions were taken by umpires Aleem Dar and Kumar Dharmasena during last week’s first Ashes Test at Trent Bridge. According to the ICC, 65 (90.3 per cent) of those were correct first time, but that number increased to 69 (95.8 per cent) when the DRS was called upon. That still leaves three incorrect decisions for the entire Test, a shortfall of roughly four per cent.

Total umpire decisions 72

Correct before review 90.3%

Correct after review 95.8%

Increase using DRS +5.5%

England reviews 4

Unsuccessful 3

Australia reviews 9

Unsucessful 7*

*Australia had one decision incorrectly reversed by the TV umpire.

View the original article here

Ashes 2013: Former coach Mickey Arthur threatens to disrupt Australia by suing over dismissal

The tourists, who lost a thrilling first Test by 14 runs in Nottingham on Sunday, have been beset by dressing room discord for months. They hoped that the astonishing removal of Arthur and his immediate replacement by Darren Lehmann would still the listing ship.

It appeared to have worked and their obdurate performance at Trent Bridge, allied to regular briefings that they were all friends together have been persuasive. But Arthur’s incendiary statements in a submission to the Fair Work Commission in Sydney have put the focus firmly back on the relationships in the team, especially between Clarke and Watson, with the Second Test beginning at Lord’s on Thursday.

Arthur, a South African, is claiming $Aus4m from his former employers, Cricket Australia, and one of several grounds of his complaint alleges racial discrimination. He has also stated that CA did not support him last year when he dropped four players from a Test match for failing to fill in a team questionnaire, in an affair which inevitably became known as Homeworkgate. Watson was one of the disciplined players.

It was an open secret that Clarke and Watson were not bosom pals but since Arthur was removed from his post they have been intent on showing the world that they can at least rub along. For most of the match in Nottingham they stood next to each other at first and second slip, though there was an eloquent moment late in England’s second innings when neither moved for a catch as the ball flew between them off an edge from Stuart Broad.

Arthur claims in the documents lodged by his lawyers and obtained by the Australian network, Channel 7, that he was “the meat in the sandwich” between conflicting camps. According to his statement, the Clarke and Watson factions in the dressing room were constantly at loggerheads.

But the former coach also suggests that he was discriminated against because he “didn’t understand the Australian way.” His employers decided to sack him following the incident during the Champions Trophy when the opening batsman, David Warner, punched the England batsman Joe Root in the face in a Birmingham bar hours after the sides had played each other in the Champions Trophy.

In his court submission, Arthur states that it was Watson who told him what Warner had done, although the player has denied doing so. Warner was banned for two matches, fined $Aus11,500 and is currently on secondment with the Australia A team in southern Africa so he can have time in the middle.

The emergence of Arthur’s detailed claim was deeply embarrassing for Australia and may unravel the good work that appeared to have been done since Lehmann took over. It was certainly the last thing they would want as they try urgently to regroup after their heartbreaking loss at Trent Bridge.

Clarke said when he fulfilled a sponsor’s engagement at a London hotel: “First I'm not going to get involved in it, the most important thing is that we as a team are as focused as we can be on Thursday. We've obviously got a huge game in front of us, the boys are feeling great, as we showed in the last Test match we're here to fight and do as well as we possibly can in this Test series, and I think we showed that the other day."

Nor was his vice-captain, Brad Haddin, who replaced Watson in the position, eager to comment on the latest revelations.

“For legal reasons I can’t go into it,” said Haddin. “All I can say is that it’s pretty obvious where the team is going, that’s as plain as the nose on your face. All the other stuff we talk about it is white noise. It hasn’t affected the side at all.”

Arthur himself, who is on holiday in his native South Africa, was aghast that the documents had been placed in the public domain. He had been hoping that his negotiations with CA could be kept private.

“I am extremely upset and disappointed that confidential documents appear to have been given by others to the media,” he said in a statement issued through his lawyers. “The matters raised by my application to the FWC concerning issues within the Australian cricket team are very sensitive, which is why I was at pains to keep them confidential, especially at this time.

“I have kept them confidential, unfortunately others have made them public. I want to stress how important to me the members of the team were, and still remain to me. The welfare of the Australian is utmost to me.”

There is much sympathy at the way in which Arthur was treated, although it was becoming clear that some members of the team had not responded to his methods. But he was shown scant understanding by Shane Warne, the former leg-spinner, who told Sky Sports: “It sounds like sour grapes to me and it's pretty disappointing. He should have been grateful for the opportunity to coach the Australian team.” When Clarke and Watson emerge from the Long Room on Thursday all eyes will be on their every move.

View the original article here

Ashes 2013: Andy Flower refuses to be critical of Stuart Broad for not walking

The latest debate has been fuelled by Stuart Broad’s decision not to walk after being caught at slip in England’s second innings at Trent Bridge. Broad, on 37, went on to make 65, a difference of 28 which proved vital in a pulsating contest England won by 14 runs. The decision of the umpire Aleem Dar to give Broad not out was not reviewed by Australia because they had already used their two permitted referrals.

Andy Flower, England’s head coach, supported his player yesterday. “When I played cricket I didn’t walk if I’d edged it, so I’d be a hypocrite to say that all other players should walk,” he said. “Most players leave it to the umpires to make the decision and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that.”

When Flower was playing for Zimbabwe he was involved in a heated incident during a match with England 12 years ago. On 99, the England wicketkeeper James Foster went up for a catch but the appeal was turned down. Foster and Flower were involved in an ugly exchange of words.

That was a one-day international in Harare, not the heat of an Ashes  battle. Broad has been attracting singular criticism, although both Michael Clarke and Brad Haddin declined to walk in Australia’s second innings. Clarke asked for his decision to be reviewed after being given out, a decision which was upheld, and Haddin,  on what was the last ball of the match, was sent on his way only when technology proved that he had inside edged the ball.

Darren Lehmann, Australia’s coach, perhaps encapsulated the view of both teams. “It’s dealt with as far as I’m concerned,” he said. “ The DRS [Decision Review System] has improved the  decision-making process. Both sides have the same issues. We’ve got to get  better at using it, basically.”

View the original article here

Angus Fraser on the Ashes: Wouldn’t cricket be better off without DRS until the wrinkles are ironed out?

For someone who has never been smitten with technology this focus marred my enjoyment of what was a stunning game of cricket. I wanted to read and hear about how well Bell had batted in a hot, intense, vital period of the Test, not that Stuart Broad had got away with edging one to slip because Australia had used up their reviews. Nor was I that fascinated by what the inventor of Hot Spot had to say for himself.

The coverage made me believe that technology is not actually serving cricket as well as it can and has too much of a hold on the game. When technology was introduced it was meant to remove real controversy from the sport by eliminating the occasional howler made by an umpire. DRS was meant to give everyone a clear understanding of what had taken place so that the correct decision could be given. On most occasions it achieves this goal. But when it fails, as the Broad and Jonathan Trott incidents highlighted, marginal decisions can easily be transformed into national catastrophes and this to me cannot be right.

At the moment cricket is half pregnant when it comes to technology. The game has created an animal that it does not know how to control. The call for technology comes from an enormous improvement in television coverage and the ability of cameras to spot detail  not previously seen. And because of this everybody knows the most effective way of reducing umpire error to a minimum is to refer every appeal or moment of uncertainty to a third umpire sat in an air-conditioned booth. On one of a dozen screens he will then, frame by frame, study the event from every angle and using every piece of technology – Hot Spot, super slowmo and audio – available. So forensic is the coverage that it won’t be long before a batsman is diagnosed with a stress fracture in his back after referring a dodgy decision. 

Cricket, understandably, is reluctant for there to be no limit on referrals because there will be periods of play where several appeals per over are sent for judgement, which will result in the game coming to a standstill. It is the reason why each captain is only allowed to incorrectly send two referrals per innings up to the third umpire.

Many believe that in the case of Broad the fault lay at Australia’s feet because Michael Clarke had incorrectly asked for two previous decisions to be looked at. I wonder whether England followers would have been so flippant had Alastair Cook used up his referrals before Brad Haddin was given out. Is it right that judging which decision to refer is now part of a captain’s skill set?

If technology is God, which many believe it is, it does not make sense that the Umpires Call rule applies. It is there to support the decision the on-field umpire makes. With many of these decisions we are talking about millimetres on a judgement where a margin for error is catered in. It is not an exact science.

The compromise makes the whole system look foolish because batsmen are given not out when the ball is hitting more of the stumps than when they are given out. And being the bitter and twisted bowler I am, yet being fully aware of the margin of error that exists in Hawk-Eye, I still struggle to see how a batsman is given not out when technology shows the ball will go on to hit the stumps.

The skill for fielding teams now is convincing an uncertain umpire to raise his finger if in doubt. With Australia having used up their referrals prior to the final day of the Test the stumps had in essence become four inches wider. Again, is it right that the odd  millimetre here and there should make such a difference?

In time I am sure these issues will be sorted out but in the meantime wouldn’t the game be better served by forgetting technology and returning to where we were? Technology was not used on England’s 2012 tour of India but do we remember the series for the occasional mistake made by an umpire? No, we remember it for the wonderful batting of Cook and Kevin Pietersen, the high quality bowling of Graeme Swann, Monty Panesar and Anderson, and because England produced a remarkable comeback to win the series 2-1.

View the original article here

Ashes 2013: Michael Clarke called Shane Watson 'a cancer on the team' alleges fired Australia coach Mickey Arthur

The tourists, who lost a thrilling first Test by 14 runs in Nottingham on Sunday, have been beset by dressing-room discord for months. They hoped that the astonishing removal of Arthur and his immediate replacement by Darren Lehmann would right the listing ship.

It appeared to have worked and their obdurate performance at Trent Bridge, allied to regular briefings that they were all friends together have been persuasive. But Arthur’s incendiary statements in a submission to the Fair Work Commission in Sydney have put the focus firmly back on relationships in the team, especially between Clarke and Watson, with the second Test  beginning at Lord’s tomorrow.

Arthur, a South African, is claiming A$4m (£2.44m) from his former  employers, Cricket Australia, and one of several grounds for his complaint  alleges racial discrimination. He has also stated that CA did not support him last year when he dropped four players from a Test match for failing to fill in a team questionnaire, an affair which inevitably became known as “Homeworkgate”. Watson was one of the disciplined players.

It was an open secret that Clarke and Watson were not bosom pals but since Arthur was removed from his post they have been intent on showing the world that they can at least rub along. For most of the match in Nottingham they stood next to each other at first and second slip, though there was an eloquent moment late in England’s second innings when neither moved for a catch as the ball flew between them off an edge from Stuart Broad.

Arthur claims in the documents lodged by his lawyers and obtained by the Australian TV network Channel 7, that he was “the meat in the sandwich” between conflicting camps. According to his statement, the Clarke and Watson factions in the dressing room were constantly at loggerheads.

But the former coach also suggests that he was discriminated against because he “didn’t understand the Australian way”. His employers decided to sack him following the incident during the Champions Trophy last month when the opening batsman David Warner punched the England batsman Joe Root in the face in a Birmingham bar hours after the sides had played each other.

In his court submission, Arthur states that it was Watson who told him what Warner had done, although the player has denied doing so. Warner was banned for two matches, fined A$11,500 and is currently on secondment with the Australia A team in southern Africa so he can have time in the middle.

The emergence of Arthur’s  detailed claim was deeply embarrassing for Australia and may unravel the good work that appeared to have been done since Lehmann took over. It was certainly the last thing they would want as they try urgently to regroup after their heartbreaking loss at Trent Bridge.

Clarke said yesterday when he fulfilled a sponsor’s engagement at a London hotel: “First, I’m not going to get involved in it, the most important thing is that we as a team are as focused as we can be on Thursday. We’ve obviously got a huge game in front of us, the boys are feeling great, as we showed in the last Test match we’re here to fight and do as well as we possibly can in this Test series, and I think we showed that the other day.”

Nor was his vice-captain, Brad Haddin, who replaced Watson in the position, eager to comment on the latest revelations.

“For legal reasons I can’t go into it,” said Haddin. “All I can say is that it’s pretty obvious where the team is going, that’s as plain as the nose on your face. All the other stuff we talk about it is white noise. It hasn’t affected the side at all.”

Arthur himself, who is on holiday in his native South Africa, was aghast that the documents had been placed in the public domain. He had been hoping that his negotiations with CA could be kept private.

“I am extremely upset and disappointed that confidential documents appear to have been given by others to the media,” he said in a statement issued through his lawyers. “The matters raised by my application to the FWC concerning issues within the Australian cricket team are very sensitive, which is why I was at pains to keep them confidential, especially at this time. I have kept them confidential, unfortunately others have made them public. I want to stress how important to me the members of the team were, and still remain to me. The welfare of the Australian cricket team is utmost to me.”

There is much sympathy over the way in which Arthur was treated,  although it was becoming clear that some members of the team had not responded to his methods. But he was shown scant understanding by Shane Warne, the former leg-spinner, who told Sky: “It sounds like sour grapes to me and it’s pretty disappointing. He should have been grateful for the opportunity to coach the Australian team.”

When Clarke and Watson emerge from the Long Room tomorrow all eyes will be on their every move.

View the original article here

Ashes 2013: Andy Flower refuses to be criticise Stuart Broad for not walking

The latest debate has been fuelled by Stuart Broad’s decision not to walk after being caught at slip in England’s second innings at Trent Bridge. Broad, on 37, went on to make 65, a difference of 28 which proved vital in a pulsating contest England won by 14 runs. The decision of the umpire Aleem Dar to give Broad not out was not reviewed by Australia because they had already used their two permitted referrals.

Andy Flower, England’s head coach, supported his player yesterday. “When I played cricket I didn’t walk if I’d edged it, so I’d be a hypocrite to say that all other players should walk,” he said. “Most players leave it to the umpires to make the decision and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that.”

When Flower was playing for Zimbabwe he was involved in a heated incident during a match with England 12 years ago. On 99, the England wicketkeeper James Foster went up for a catch but the appeal was turned down. Foster and Flower were involved in an ugly exchange of words.

That was a one-day international in Harare, not the heat of an Ashes  battle. Broad has been attracting singular criticism, although both Michael Clarke and Brad Haddin declined to walk in Australia’s second innings. Clarke asked for his decision to be reviewed after being given out, a decision which was upheld, and Haddin,  on what was the last ball of the match, was sent on his way only when technology proved that he had inside edged the ball.

Darren Lehmann, Australia’s coach, perhaps encapsulated the view of both teams. “It’s dealt with as far as I’m concerned,” he said. “ The DRS [Decision Review System] has improved the  decision-making process. Both sides have the same issues. We’ve got to get  better at using it, basically.”

View the original article here

Ashes 2013: Brad Haddin insists there is 'no feud' between Michael Clarke and Shane Watson

Arthur's claim that Clarke and Watson are at loggerheads, which emerged as the South African pursues a racial discrimination claim against Cricket Australia, was described as "white noise" by Haddin.

The timing of Arthur's statement, in legal documents quoted in the Australian media, could hardly be much worse as Clarke's side prepare for the start of the second Investec Test at Lord's tomorrow.

Haddin, who took them so close to a surprise opening victory at Trent Bridge on Sunday only to be caught-behind via DRS as they lost in the end by a mere 14 runs, is confident Australia's Ashes prospects will not be adversely affected.

After Arthur's claims were published yesterday, Cricket Australia lawyer Dean Kino said: "We're disappointed that it's come to this position."

Clarke had a public engagement too in London yesterday, at which he was unsurprisingly loath to discuss the matter and would only say his team "are very focused on what is in front of us".

Haddin was also tight-lipped at his Lord's press conference, but a little more forthcoming.

"The Ashes is as good as it gets - all the other stuff is white noise," he said.

"It has not affected the side.

"The Australian dressing room is fine. There is no feud."

Haddin insists there have been no problems inside the camp at all, during a tour which has so far seen opening batsman David Warner suspended for punching England batsman Joe Root in a Birmingham bar after defeat in the Champions Trophy, then Arthur sacked and Darren Lehmann brought in to replace him.

"The group has been fine since day one of the tour," he said.

"We're all hurt from losing the (first) Test.

"It hasn't driven us closer together - it has made us determined to win a Test."

Meanwhile, a statement released on behalf of Arthur and Harmers Workplace Lawyers confirmed proceedings had been filed against his former employers "on a number of grounds" including "racial discrimination".

Arthur also stressed details of the documents which appeared in the Australian media had not been released by him.

"I am extremely upset and disappointed that confidential documents appear to have been given by others to the media," Arthur said.

"The matters raised in my application to the FWC (Fair Work Commission) concerning issues within the Australian cricket team are very sensitive, which is why I was at pains to keep them confidential, especially at this time.

"I have kept them confidential, unfortunately others have now made them public."

The statement also said a "confidential conciliation" would take place between the parties next week.

PA

View the original article here

Ashes 2013: England and Australia ready for opening salvoes

England's captain, Alastair Cook, warms up against Essex before the first Ashes Test with Australia at Trent Bridge. Photograph: Paul Childs/Action Images

Here we go then. Thankfully the time for speculation is almost gone. On Wednesday at Trent Bridge Shane Watson or Alastair Cook will take guard in sunshine, so it seems, and cricket's oldest private battle will be resumed.

It will not be that private. The press box will be packed and so, too, the stands; the TV cameras will zoom in on every combatant exposing any signs of anxiety or fear on the faces of every cricketer lucky enough to be involved. On two continents even those with a passing knowledge of cricket will want to know the score. They may not be too bothered in Mumbai or Multan but from Melton Mowbray to Melbourne they will be avidly following the progress of Root or Rogers with furrowed brows.

The first Test of an Ashes series is special. Whether the same excitement will still be there when the two captains toss up in Sydney on 3 January before the 10th consecutive Test between these two nations remains to be seen. If that is the case, we will have witnessed much staggering drama along the way.

The clinical view must be that this series cannot equal the last two in England. In 2005 we witnessed the most dramatic and the best Ashes series of all, when there was never a dull hour, let alone a dull day. The 2009 contest seldom touched those heights but the tension remained until the final day at The Oval, where Cook held the catch which ensured that the Ashes were regained.

This time England set off as favourites, a little uncomfortably as recently they have been prone to play in a constipated manner when expected to win.

Australia's journey to the opening match at Trent Bridge has been eccentric, to say the least, but England's has been as tranquil as it gets. There have been injury concerns over Graeme Swann, Kevin Pietersen and Stuart Broad but it now seems as if all three will be fit to play. Maybe the lure of the Ashes really can be a great healer. In considerable contrast to their opponents the make-up of the England side has caused only minimal head-scratching along with some local heartache.

It has been a tough month for Nick Compton. The Ashes is the pinnacle and he is going to miss out at the start of the series. The selectors have opted to open with Joe Root, with Jonny Bairstow batting at six. This may not be fair on Compton but fairness is not – and should not be – the first criterion for selectors. Their duty is to pick what they consider the best, not the fairest, team and essentially they have opted for Bairstow rather than Compton. As it happens, both average 31 in Test cricket.

Compton is probably better informed about the Australian bowlers than anyone else. He has faced all of them in the last week either for Somerset or, remarkably, for Worcester, a state of affairs that may have left him both mystified and miffed. One can only assume that after the second Test at Lord's we will see Compton striding out against the Australians once again – for Sussex at Hove.

The Australians will certainly target the two young Yorkshiremen, Root and Bairstow, who are the only players in the England side not to have experienced the peculiar thrill of an Ashes contest (Australia are likely to have five Ashes debutants in their team).

It will also be tough for whichever bowler England choose to omit. The choice will be between Tim Bresnan and Steven Finn. If Bairstow is the bolder choice when selecting the batsmen, Finn is probably the more aggressive selection among the bowlers. However, Bresnan may like to point out that in his last two Tests at Nottingham, in 2011 and 2012, he took 15 wickets against India and West Indies. Moreover Bresnan did score a century, which qualified as first-class – for a couple of days at least – against Essex in England's desultory warm-up match.

The make-up of the Australian side is harder to predict but the assumption is that they will stick with the bowling attack used at Taunton: James Pattinson, Mitchell Starc, Peter Siddle and Nathan Lyon. This quartet is not so experienced as England's. Pattinson and Starc will bowl wayward spells but, when they click, they are dangerous.

Australia's new coach, Darren Lehmann, has been as candid as he can be about his batting line-up. He has already said that Watson and Chris Rogers will open – a month ago it might have been Ed Cowan and David Warner. My guess is that they will bat Cowan at three, Michael Clarke and Phil Hughes at four and five and that they will take a punt on Warner at six, even though his suspension meant that he has been unable to play in either of Australia's warm-up games. Whoever they select, England will have the more experienced line-up.

Even the Australians acknowledge that England are the favourites. In fact they seem happy as underdogs. Starc made a point of mentioning the 1989 series the other day as a source of encouragement for the Australians (Starc, by the way, must have been doing his homework, for want of a better phrase, because he was not born until 1990).

In 1989 Australia were also second favourites; they had lost the previous two Ashes series and the anticipation was that Allan Border's side would be swept away. That was the summer during which Graham Gooch was usually lbw to Terry Alderman and half the England side were eyeing an ill-conceived but highly lucrative rebel tour to South Africa. Australia won 4-0.

Do not expect that scoreline to be repeated this time. But nor should anyone anticipate an easy victory for England. Despite everything the Australians are looking like a team again – and it is the Ashes.

View the original article here

Ashes 2013: England warned Trent Bridge is no swinger's paradise

JImmy Anderson has taken 39 Test wickets in six appearances at Trent Bridge since 2003 at an average of less than 18. Photograph: Pat Chapman/Actionplus

England have been warned that Trent Bridge is unlikely to live up to its reputation as a swinger's paradise, and therefore Jimmy Anderson's favourite Test ground, this week, especially given the glorious forecast. But Chris Read, the former Test wicketkeeper and long-serving Nottinghamshire captain, believes the unusual dryness of the ground will still suit England's ability to exploit reverse swing and spin.

Anderson has taken 39 of his 307 Test wickets in six appearances in Nottingham since 2003 at an average of less than 18, helping England to win five of those matches, including convincing victories in each of the last four.

But Graeme Swann and Stuart Broad have already passed on to Anderson that conditions at Trent Bridge this season have not been favouring the Nottinghamshire seam bowlers. The last two County Championship matches at the ground have petered out into draws with a total of 1,811 runs scored for the loss of only 31 wickets.

"All the feedback we're getting from the Notts boys is that it's not swung as much this year," Anderson said. "The pitch is very flat and very dry, so we don't really know what to expect until we get there and practise."

"I think the square has been changing for the last three or four years," said Read. "A lot of people have put it down to these new outfields – the one at Trent Bridge is fantastic in terms of absorbing the water from rain, but the theory is that it is also sucking moisture out of the square.

"I certainly think that for the majority of our games this year there has been less moisture in the ground and it's therefore been giving less assistance to all the quick bowlers.

"We did have a low-scoring game against Surrey but that was played under leaden skies with the floodlights on – and from what I've heard that's not going to be the case this week.

"I would imagine there will be some swing early on with the new ball but then the wicket will deteriorate nicely. There isn't generally a great deal of spin at Trent Bridge but there could be this time and I would imagine reverse swing, too. We've seen England exploiting that with a white ball in the Champions Trophy and I think back to the 2005 Ashes series, especially Simon Jones at Old Trafford, when it was also important.

"I don't think Jimmy and Broady and whoever else gets picked will be overly concerned because they've shown they are a fantastic outfit whatever the conditions," said Read.

View the original article here