South Africa v India: A Chance of History

Graeme Smith - A chance of History rejected. - © ramograph 

History within reach, a World Record total tumbling in front of our eyes, and then, nothing.

As Dale Steyn joined Vernon Philander at the crease, South Africa required 16 runs from 18 balls to set a World Record for a Test run-chase.

The total required, 458, seemed an unlikely and far-off dream at the start of the day, but a double-century partnership from Francois Du Plessis and AB De Villiers took South Africa from a position at which a draw would have been lovely, to almost-certain victory.

Du Plessis was solid, and De Villiers was more expansive, but the partnership saw two batsmen complementing each other, and scoring quickly enough to threaten the target. 

When De Villiers fell on 103, Du Plessis took up the reins, and even when JP Duminy fell quickly and Philander arrived at the crease, shots were being played, and the run-rate was manageable.

The wicket of Du Plessis, a needless run-out, appears to have been the moment the tactic changed. Dale Steyn avoided most of the next over, as short deliveries flew past him, but even at this stage, 16 from 12 as worth chasing.

Inevitably Dhoni put the field back, with more than a run-a-ball required, Philander would have to be clever; he chose not to try.

He blocked the first two deliveries of the penultimate over, and turned down singles from the next two, signalling his intent to defend and protect a draw.

It seems that the word from the South African think-tank, sent out with Dale Steyn, was one of caution and defence.

As a cricket fan, I entirely understand that a game can be played for five days, and result in a draw. I also understand that leaving a game with a draw can be a positive result, but not in this instance.

The crowd who had gathered hoping to see history at the Wanderers rightly booed as runs were turned down, because this was cricket letting itself down.

Sport is loved because of the moments that are created. As a chance of history, and one of those moments became available for Graeme Smith’s South Africa to grasp, the opportunity was turned down.

Whilst the game can end in a draw, if the win is available you must go for it, if only to protect the integrity of the sport, particularly when your sport is as maligned as cricket so often is.

Analysis: Australia Regain the Ashes (Originally posted on Sports Gazette)

Mitchell Johnson salutes the crowd during his dream series - © WILLIAM WEST/ AFP/ Getty Images

The Sports Gazette Ashes team discuss how England have gone from comfortable Ashes winners in the summer to a spectacular defeat Down Under.

As Jimmy Anderson fended a short delivery to the short-leg fielder to give Mitchell Johnson his 23^rd wicket of the series, the inevitable became reality, and the Ashes were lost with two Tests to go.

This is a far cry from the summer when England’s bowlers made the entire Australian batting line-up look ordinary in a 3-0 series victory.

Having provided live text coverage of the final day of the first Test, and the entirety of Tests two and three, the Sports Gazette team are perfectly placed to try and explain the huge swing in the favour of the Australians.

Where have the Ashes been won and lost?

Richard Jude: The margins are finer than they look, but the batting has been the key. In England the pitches were slow and difficult to bat on, this brought the par scores down and Ian Bell carried England. In Australia the pitches have been quicker and suited aggressive batting, England were unable to raise their game where Australia did, and one century in six innings is never going to be good enough.

Justin Feck: Australia won the Ashes because they were willing to sacrifice the summer series to build a team and their confidence towards pitches that suit their style of play. England became over-confident and failed to prepare properly.

Simon Collings: It is a cliché, but clichés are clichés because they are true - 'catches win matches'. England have simply not been good enough in the field. Missed opportunities have allowed Australian batsmen to go on and score big hundreds, which have taken games away from England.

Grant Yardley: England’s first innings batting. To score over 200 just once is appalling and you can’t expect to draw let alone win a Test if you fail to do so. Australia’s attack also carried more pace, with Mitchell Johnson back in form and the likes of Steven Finn out of form.

So why the change from the summer?

Richard: The lack of a form man to carry England’s batting, combined with a bowler that can consistently reach 92mph and above to terrorise them, has seen the side repeatedly lose clusters of wickets and come up woefully short of Australia’s efforts.

Justin: England believed that Australia were an easy target but failed to push on from that point. Players in the England team believe they can't be dropped and have stopped performing. Australia made the big calls when needed e.g. Bringing Lehmann in with fresh ideas.

Simon: For me the whole thing smacks of complacency. Even before the summer began there was talk of England winning 10-0. Following on from the 3-0 win back home, I just feel that Alistair Cook and his team took their foot of the gas. It is no surprise, when you are at the summit of any sport it is hard to motivate yourself to stay there.

Grant: The wickets were quicker, which suited Johnson in particular, and Australia’s batsmen found it easier to score runs against England’s attack – probably due to the lack of swing on offer Down Under.

How much of this result has been determined by the confidence of the two teams, and other mental factors, rather than ability and effort?

Richard: Certain Australian players like David Warner and Mitchell Johnson have had the chance to express themselves, and the rewards have been reaped. In contrast, Jonathan Trott’s illness was obviously affecting his form and confidence, and Matt Prior is another example of a man who for the most part has looked mentally exhausted and bereft of confidence.

Justin: England lost because they failed to concentrate on their shot selection and building an innings. That doesn't take away anything from an incredible Australian attack that would blow away most teams. 

Simon: The mental state of the sides has played a huge role. Australia have had the bit between their teeth, right from the start of this series. They were clearly hurting from the summer and came out all guns blazing. As for England, they just seemed to lack focus. In terms of talent, there is little to separate the sides. I just think that Australia wanted it a little more. 

Grant: England’s experienced batsmen didn’t score the runs that their averages suggested they should. So yes, it would suggest that the tourists’ problems were more mental than technical. Also, Jonathan Trott’s personal issues were a big blow.

How big is the gap between England and Australia, and where do you think these two rank in the world?

Richard: I’ve been concerned about the inability of England’s batting line-up to produce big totals since 2011, so Australia will need to beat South Africa and India before they are at the very top of the game again. The gap between the sides is as big as England’s batsman have been poor, If the current form is part of the decline of the Pietersen and Bell, as well as the inability to replace Strauss or Collingwood, then the gap may be a big one until new talent is bedded in.

Justin: On this series, Australia have shown they are in the big league again. After losing the likes of Warne, Ponting and Hussey in the last 6 years, they needed fresh blood to come through and bed in. England need to do the same, and with the likes of Root and Stokes, it shows new players can come in and play in an established team. 

Simon: I would not say there is too much between the two sides, even after this series. Both are formidable opponents in their own country, just look at England only a few months ago. In terms of their place on the world stage, both are behind South Africa - who for me are the best team in the world. Their bowling attack is terrifying. I dread to think the damage they could cause on a hard Australian wicket.

Grant: I think the gap is very small and Australia has won this series mainly due to conditions suiting their players and poor form from the England batsmen. If you asked me to name a best XI from the two teams, there would still be a few Englishmen in the side.

Compared to other sides around the World, I feel these two are pretty poor. South Africa and India would win comfortably, and Pakistan and Sri Lanka wouldn’t be frightened of facing them on their own pitches.

What next for this England side?

Richard: Transition. There is a transitional period ahead, and England need to work out how best to progress without emptying the team of experience in one go. The form of Ben Stokes, and the fight shown by Joe Root were as positive as Pietersen’s selfish dismissals were negative, and they’ll be key men in the teams built going forward.

Justin: The next thing for England is to look at the role of Pietersen. Sadly he has decided he is on a one man mission to destroy every bowler he faces without thinking of the team and the game situation. The bowling attack is in desperate need of more pace. The fact that Mitchell Johnson was consistently clearing 94mph and wiping out the batting line-up, shows England need a new quick bowler. The role of Flower might be called into question but that is premature as it was not the side he put out that failed, it was the players for not taking responsibility to do their job.

Simon: I would like to see England look to the future and start building another top side. I am not saying they need mass changes, but the integration of some youngsters would be beneficial. As for the coaches, they need to look at the positives. Ben Stokes has demonstrated that he may well be the answer to England's all-rounder problem, an area which has troubled selectors since Andrew Flintoff's retirement.

Grant: Andy Flower’s position will no doubt be called into question, but I feel he will be given another home series to prove his worth. He must decide whether to persevere with senior batsmen such as Kevin Pietersen, who haven’t scored the volume of runs their talent merits. The wicketkeeper must be up for grabs as Prior’s failures with the bat is being made worse by his errors with the gloves.

England have lacked wicket-takers in this series and they will need to address that – Bresnan puts in a shift but is he ever going to take a five-wicket haul? Finally Swann is no longer a certainty as England’s premier spinner, and teams will certainly look to attack him if he does keep his place.

It’s the 11^th June, the 1^st Test of the summer starts tomorrow against Sri Lanka, what is your England team?

Richard: Cook, Carberry, Trott/Bell, Bell/Morgan, Root, Stokes, Prior, Broad, Swann, Anderson, Finn

Justin: Cook, Carberry, Root, Pietersen, Bell, Stokes, Prior, Swann, Broad, Anderson, Mills

Simon: Cook, Robson, Root, Pietersen, Bell, Stokes, Prior, Broad, Swann, Anderson, Finn

Grant: Cook, Carberry, Bell, Root, Ballance, Stokes, Prior, Broad, Anderson, Finn, Swann/Panesar 

The Missing Ashes Blogs, England’s World Cup draw and an end-of-term update

John Lense-on, Paul i-MacCartney, Ring-Ringo Star and Georgina Harrison
The modern-Beatles recreate Abbey Road in a photography lesson © Giulio Gasparin 

As England slumped to the inevitable defeat on the fifth morning of the second Ashes Test I was left with the conundrum of how to objectively word another appraisal without going over old ground.

The fact that several batsmen got out playing the same shot wasn't going to make the task any easier.

As I have been part of an increasingly professional and impressive coverage of the Tests on Sports Gazette, our student publication, I thought it might be nice to share the burden of explaining England’s woes. This idea will be trialled for the third Test.

So keep an eye out here for a summary when this current Test finishes, and a link to the article as our crack-team explains where it has all gone wrong.

Regarding the final day of the second Test, the England tactics were virtually non-existent, and as Broad, Prior and the tail threw that bat, fifty runs were scored rapidly, but from the moment Broad got out to the fifth ball of the morning, to Monty Panesar’s demise, it was when, and not if, Australia would win.

Another issue that is worthy of comment is the World Cup draw that has placed England in the Group of Death, helpfully caricatured by Greg Dyke’s cut-throat symbol.

As soon as England went into the draw without a top seeding, all hell was scheduled to break loose. The Fifa World Ranking system produces some bizarre results, but you’d be hard-pushed to suggest England are one of the best eight teams on the planet.

Therefore, once there is an acceptance of this, it is also accepted that the draw would put England against one of those teams.

However, whether or not it is unlucky, the group is a tough one, made harder by the trip to Manaus and the humid conditions that will greet the players as the opening fixture kicks off earlier in the day than initially planned.

The stereotypical result would be to draw the opening game 1-1 through a set-piece goal (see England’s previous starts to major tournaments), scrape something against the Uruguayan’s and sneak through in the final group fixture unconvincingly.

With England losing so poorly to Chile and Germany at Wembley last month though, the levels of pre-World Cup optimism may be at an all time low. In previous friendly matches against big opposition, England have defied expectations and got credible results and sometime impressive wins.

During Capello’s reign, and Sven before him, the major tournament results were disappointing, but there was at least some semblance of form in show-piece non-competitive fixtures.

It is with that in mind that I abandon any optimism and only foresee an early exit, but it is the manner of this I will be looking out for, with the future in mind.

Finally, the calendar informs me that I’ve been making the painstaking expedition from Brentwood to Twickenham, for twelve weeks now, and we have broken up for Christmas. (A key advantage for never ending further-education)

The time has flown past in a blur of cold station platforms, shorthand outlines and local angles. I have observed and learned many things in this period of time including, but not limited to:

• -       Phil Collins is big in Italy
• -       The best method for bringing down the school prefect system ISN'T becoming a prefect
• -       The easiest way to wind up someone from ‘The Costa Del Gloucester’ is to call them Northern
• -       Crocs are the perfect shoes for any outfit
• -       Anything is news if it’s local

I have also been learning slightly more sports-journalism specific things, and have managed to produce some articles for the Sports Gazette, live-blog the catastrophe down-under, and record and put-together a 5-minute radio feature about Tchoukball, a sport that still mystifies the majority of my course-mates.

I remain unconvinced by Journalism as a profession, and may take a characteristically bizarre detour at the end of the course, but I'm glad I took up the place on the course, because otherwise I’d have always wondered.

The Christmas break will see a lot of shorthand and plenty of Public Affairs revision as the exam beckons in January, but I’ll have plenty of time to watch the World Championship Darts too. Now that’s a proper winter-sport!

Ashes 2013/14 – 2nd Test, Day 4: Improvement is relative

Unorthodox - The Pietersen technique... KP's 50 was part of a better showing for England - © Nic Redhead

Advertising and encouraging people to read a blog that contains 500+ words of despair is becoming more and more difficult every day. Day four was better for England, but only relatively speaking.

Before this, their fourth innings of the series, England have failed to make 200, so finishing the day on 247-6 is an improvement, and there were individual positives to be found.

However, for all the improvements that can be seen in this innings, the pitch is still flat, and there was never any sense that England might come close to the mammoth total Australia compiled over the first two days.

With the threat of showers on day four and five, Michael Clarke had no hesitation in declaring before the start of play and setting England the challenge of scoring 531 runs to level the series.

Captain Alastair Cook, who has struggled this year against Australia, lasted only seven balls and the tone was set for another disappointing day.

The dismissal was a simple one, and because of that all the more miserable. Johnson banged in a short ball in his first over and Cook took on a hook shot he was never in control of that found Ryan Harris at fine leg.

If falling for the trap once was bad, step forward Michael Carberry to compound things…

Peter Siddle’s bouncer wasn’t as fast or high, and Carberry had much more time to play the shot, but the result was the same.

Nathan Lyon was the fielder this time, but it was suddenly 20/2 and there was a danger that England could fail to take the Test into the fifth day again.

From this point onwards the morning session was England’s, but to revisit a phrase that epitomises this series, the damage was already done.

Kevin Pietersen joined Joe Root at the crease, and England’s most flamboyant player and England’s most smiley player both made half centuries as they took part in the tourists’ first century stand of the series.

Root was compact and watchful, and Pietersen, though relatively reserved, found time to bully Steve Smith in a reflection that he may be finding some form.

When Pietersen’s wicket fell, it was once again due to the flexibility of Michael Clarke’s captaincy. Having given Mitchell Johnson the chance to prise out a wicket with sheer pace, Clarke changed tack and gave Shane Watson and Peter Siddle the task of building pressure.

After three successive maidens Pietersen dragged on for 53 and Australia had the momentum once again.

In the internal competition building within the England team for worst dismissal of the series, Ian Bell made his case.

Charging Steve Smith and miss-hitting a full-toss to mid-on is a terrible way to get out in any scenario, but batting against a part-time bowler as you attempt to save a Test match makes this all the more horrifying.

If Bell’s wicket confirmed another successful session for Australia right on the stroke of tea, the final session of the day took shape quicker.

There was some resistance from Ben Stokes who made 28, but Joe Root falling for 87 was the key wicket and despite a late rally from the hopelessly out of form Matt Prior and Stuart Broad, Australia will be rightly pleased with their day.

Session score: 3-0 to Australia – 10-2 overall

Verdict: England were better, but it’s still not good enough. With two wickets lost in each session Australia are doing enough, with plenty to spare. Even with rain around, it would take something unbelievable to save this Test match, because 247-6 is England’s best score of the series, and even with the improvements, there are still key issues regarding longevity at the crease and suspect dismissals.

Ashes 2013/14 – 2nd Test, Day 3: ...And so it goes on.

One Day Mode - David warner may as well have been wearing Yellow during this innings - © Sum_of_Marc

“If the second day was a bad one for England, it didn’t get any better on the third day at the Gabba.”

These were my opening sentiments during the 1^st Test, the same could be said for the events at the Adelaide Oval overnight. A complete catastrophe.

I first whispered the words 5-0 in the moments after 1^st Test defeat, more in a reflection of how badly England had played on that occasion than in a genuine belief that it might happen, now it looks increasingly possible.

Former England captain, Michael Vaughan, in Australia with BBC TMS said today that England could lose 5-0 if this form continues, and with a batting line-up that cannot make 200 there are problems that won’t be solved by quick fixes or a bit of luck here or there.

Having battled through to the close, Michael Carberry and Joe Root began the day at the crease with England 35-1, and whilst they continued at a circumspect strike-rate, the early stages were relatively calm.

Root barely played a shot in anger as he moved on to 15 from 79 balls, and the 80^th ball, the first he faced from Nathan Lyon on the day, was evidently the wrong one to go after, his top edged sweep flew to Chris Rogers who only needed to take a few steps in from the boundary to take the catch.

If Root’s shot was bad, Kevin Pietersen’s was probably worse. Michael Clarke is described as a creative captain, but his trap for Pietersen is far from subtle.

He places two fielders at mid-wicket and waits for the South-African born batsman’s ego to force him into hitting it straight at one of them, he’d made four by the time he did it on this occasion.

The next to go was Carberry who had put together a well made half-century before lazily pulling to David Warner who took a stunning catch.

Carberry’s dismissal wasn’t in the same league as Root’s or Pietersen’s, and could be described as unlucky, but he picked the man out and for that he can be criticised.

After this, Mitchell Johnson took centre stage once again and ripped through the middle order and tail, leaving Prior run-less again and shattering Anderson’s stumps along the way.

The only man who stood up to be counted was Ian Bell; his innings was bizarre, but classy, he can always be counted upon to be classy…

He shot off like a train and had 25 at better than a run a ball, but as pressure was built up through maiden overs, and Carberry fell he also began to get bogged down and could only watch as the rest of his team mates arrived and then departed.

His innings of 72*, that included four 6s, was the one stand out in a third England innings of the series to include a spell in which at least four wickets were lost for less than ten runs.

Another thing worth noting, alongside the miraculous comeback of Johnson, is that the Australian’s have got their taste back for bullying opponents.

Michael Clarke could have enforced the follow-on with England still 398 runs behind, but he wants them to suffer.

He knows full well that with that many runs in hand he could have thrown them back in to bat and had an innings victory to celebrate by tea on day four, but that isn’t as painful or humiliating as this can be, so he’s gone for the throat.

By choosing to bat again, he has enabled David Warner to smash England’s bowlers around, he has sent the whole team out in the heat for a bit longer ahead of the 3^rd Test, and given already tired bowlers a bigger workload.

He is also saying that he doesn’t think he needs maximum time to bowl England out in the second innings, and frankly he’s probably right.

Session score: 3-0 to Australia – 7-2 overall

Verdict: Like in the 1^st Test, after an even opening day, things got bad and then worse. Day three was like living out a nightmare for just about every England player. The key protagonists for Australia were Johnson and Warner, but the whole team is contributing to a convincing victory.