This is so tense.
Well, that was fun!
Fun isn’t exactly the word I’d use, but what a match!
Hats off to Australia, England just couldn’t quite do enough with the ball in the end. Pitch didn’t deteriorate as much as it might have (kudos to the ground staff, decent wicket in the circumstances I’d say) and overhead conditions didn’t seem to make the ball move much today.
I’m not going to criticise but I’m surprised England didn’t set more aggressive fields towards the end, it was obvious Australia would get the runs unless they got out, so make them play more shots. One more wicket could very easily have turned into the 2 needed.
I fear this win will (rightly) fill a slightly fragile Aussies side with confidence and ultimately decide the series.
yes, well done to the Aussies, I’ll take another four similar tests please!
I’m a bit short on details but from the commentary I have access to I think this win (in a very good game of cricket) is that AUS won due to Bazball and the selection of Bairstow as keeper.
-
By this I mean that this result was only possible because of how fast ENG scored. If ENG had scored at the AUS rate there wouldn’t have been time for a cracking finale.
The approach is highly applaudable and hope it continues. You can see that it has got into the AUS heads evidenced by the defensive fields employed by Cummins and Warner, Lambuschagne and Smith getting out to impulsive shots. -
I’m old school nea dinosaur and IMHO not picking Folkes gave AUS the ability to score parity on the first inning. Sure Bairstow can score quickly, but so can the guys up the order. And he costs ENG both runs and momentum with the gloves. If he isn’t sound enough to open the batting, the team balance requires the best available keeper.
Bazball isn’t just about scoring runs quickly but also setting attacking fields, bowling attacking line and length to create chances and take them.
In retrospect another 20 runs in the first innings might have been very useful indeed.
Disagree, it was the extra 80 runs scored on day one that set up the finale. Another 20 was meh.
Methinks that’s a rather long blow.
Unless the memory fails me, they won the WTC just last week didn’t they?
Have 4 batters in the current top 10 (inc 1,2&3). Two bowlers in top 10. Carey must be right near the top and Starc is a top 10 alll rounder (snort!).
I’ll stand corrected but my assessment is that’s as highly ranked team as AUS have fielded since 1950.
No, I will - you’re quite right. But they just didn’t seem as confident/comfortable as the home side, going into the series. Maybe it’s just a slight attitude change compared with the braggadocio of the Warne/McGrath era. At, any rate, if I’m right that situation will now have reversed, which is my concern.
I have to think that neither team will have had their mindest substantially shifted by the game or the tactics used.
It was very, very close. England will know that holding on to a couple more catches and Moeen being fit would probably have seen them home and Australia will think that their more conservative approach has seen them crowned as World Test champions and brought them home here.
There were no huge collapses, no barnstorming bowling displays, a couple of strong and very important centuries but really it was finely poised all the way through and that’s great for the game.
I think this is dead right. I like the attacking declaration and the quick scoring - it’s what gave us such a thrilling game.
And Bairstow can score runs quickly. But so can Crawley. So can Pope. So can Root. So can Stokes. So can Brooke. What England are missing is not an explosive batter. What we’re missing is a frontline spinner with an intact finger; and a keeper who takes more than half their chances. Can’t do much about the first of those problems, but Foakes is right there.
Some stats on Khawaja’s batting.
Was at the crease on all five days play.
206 runs (141 & 65)
518 deliveries
796 minutes which is longer than the season of Succession or the first five Harry Potter movies combined.
He earned his (much reduced) match fee.
Bazball is buggered if the teams don’t also bowl the min number of overs.
It’s against the game principals but there needs to be a sanction measured in penalty runs or even wickets for the overs not bowled. The match fee penalty is insufficient and I doubt the players actually pay it out of their own pocket. Moeen and Lyon bowled plenty of overs so the quicks could dawdle even more?
In other international cricket news, the Scotland/Ireland Group B CWC qualifier went right down to the wire, with Scotland 9 down and needing 2 off the last ball. And…
YES SIR, I CAN BOOGIE!
…as Leask (who hit 21 in over 47 to drag Scotland back into contention) plays a carefully crafted inside edge that runs down to the boundary. They all count.
Whilst transversing the heathen non-cricketing lands I was musing on the contrast in styles on display so far in the Ashes.
To stretch the illustration it’s a bit like the best international football games are between top South America and European nations who play contrasting styles.
Part of the success of Bazball is a beguiling trap. With so much T20 being played it gets into teams match plans. Say you have a T20 where a par score is say160 and the opposition swing the bat and get 185. Now you know you can get the 160 and have planned out how to get the target. But now you have to go away from Plan A and play their way.
Similarly with Bazball. It is interesting to see commentary from players facing it say how much they enjoyed the aggressive intent. Naturally, most of these are batters. 
So the temptation is to try and emulate even though that isn’t your strength. Come in spinner.
I figure that Stokes Day1 declaration was predetermined. The ENG Plan A was go hard on a wicket designed for it, get 450 and have 20 minutes with the new ball. But AUS didn’t play that way. Kept defensive fields concede singles, prevent boundaries, let the batters start thinking about the clock. Copped the chiaking. Kept the game from running away from them.
Bazball is a (laudable) commitment to attack and it requires the team commitment that there is no Plan B. It is best beaten by playing good solid cricket. Maintain your wickets. Play the ball on merits. Bowl tight lines and lengths to conservative fields. Take your catches.
Of course, the Australians aren’t confident/comfortable.
The thing is - Test cricket is a game with one of the most pronounced home-ground advantages in all sports. Lots of reasons why - it just is.
Australia last won a series in England back in 2001. They lost in 2005, 2009, 2013, 2015 and drew in 2019.
England last won a series in Australia in 2009-2010. They’ve lost the three series since then (actually have not even won a Test Match in Australia in the last 3 series - played 15, lost 13, drawn 2). Prior to 2009-2010 thay had lost their previous 5 series in Australia (winning only 3 of the 25 tests played).
Winning a series away is very, very hard. Every Test-playing country rightly celebrates its overseas series wins. If Australia can win this time, it is a massive achievement and will be lauded greatly. England SHOULD win. Yes, Australia recently won the World Test Championship, but no one really cares about that, and it was played at a neutral venue.
There’s still some historical memories going back to the period 1989-2001 when Australia won 4 consecutive away series in England. This had not happened (by either country) since the 19th century, and it involved a historically great group of Australian players. And anyway, it was 20 years ago.
The Women’s Ashes is going on in the break between games, although it’s a bit of a batfest, with Aus 134/1 after two first innings scores over 450. Tammy Beaumont became the first English woman to get a double ton, though.
Two quick wickets and it’s looking like we might have three results very much possible at the end of day 4 in this one as well.
In the World Cup qualifying West Indies have left themselves a stiff task. They will need to beat Sri Lanka in the Super Sixes to qualify, I think.
Let’s see if England’s #6-10 can pull it off tomorrow. I’m hoping they make a good attempt at least rather than folding in an hour.