Fifth ASHES Test (The Oval)

After humiliation inside 3 days at Headingly, England have hit back with an impressive 4 day win at The Oval. The stage of many Ashes victories, that ground's reputation for spin was apparently ignored by Australia who left out Nathan Hauritz in what will be remembered as the worst decision made during the Ashes of 2009.
Below is an account of the 5th test match and in the next few days I will provide a series overview.

FIRST INNINGS
England 332-10
Bell 72
Strauss 55
Siddle 4-75

The reputation of this pitch to be full of pace and bounce proved to be true on every other delivery and so batting was difficult for all the batsmen and if it had not been for a good partnership between Strauss and Bell, after the early loss of Cook, the good total of 332 would have been much lower. The interesting selection Trott played well for 41 before an unfortunate run out. Siddle bowled very well throughout the day and his performance largely covered up the obvious error by Ponting of not picking a spinner

SECOND INNINGS
Australia 160-10
Katich 50
Broad 5-37 and Swann 4-38

From 72-0 just after lunch Australia experienced its second horrific batting collapse of the series (after Lords) and I fear it will prove just as fatal to their cause. Stuart Broad came of age as a bowler before our very eyes by ripping out 5 middle order wickets in the middle session while Swann cleaned up at the other end. With a massive lead England look almost certain to win 2-1 as they did in 2005.

THIRD INNINGS
England 373-9 dec
Trott 119
Strauss 75
North 4-98

After a few nervous moments at the end of Day Two when score became 3-39, England set about building a huge lead on Day Three with Strauss and Trott showing the right balance of patience and aggression on the fast-deteriorating wicket. Trott scored a fine debut hundred (the 18th Englishman to do this AND 3 of the others are in the current line up: Strauss, Cook and Prior). Strauss should have declared as soon as Trott was dismissed in order to bowl for two hours at Australia but chose to bat further with the tailenders.

FOURTH INNINGS
Australia 348-10
Hussey 121
Ponting 66
Swann 4-120 and Harmison 3-54

Strauss continued a stance of defensive captaincy at the end of Day Three with a field including just two slips, deep fine leg and deep square leg - understandable perhaps if the target was 200 or less (although just barely) but not when the opposition requires 546. Despite this charitable madness both openers were removed with in 5 minutes of each other early on Day 4 before a great partnership between Ponting and Hussey - at the end of which they looked hardly troubled. Enter Flintoff, enjoying a fairly quiet match, he let fly a brilliant throw from mid-on to run-out the Australian captain and when Clarke was sadly run out by Strauss in the next over, the game was decided. Hussey returned to some form with his 10th century but the games was rapped up soon afterwards as Harmison came on and cleaned up the tail.

Some Observations:

• While many were saying good bye to England's best all-rounder since Botham, their next one delivered a stunning spell to destroy Australia on Day Two. Broad has had many critics since his entry into international cricket, myself being a vocal one, but now we must eat our words. Flintoff ran through the Australian middle order in the 2005 Oval test to help gain the desired result and his replacement has achieved the same here.
• Strauss's decision to delay the declaration and then to set up sutch a defensive field may have surprised and infuriated some but he more than made up for that the next day when he picked Harmison to break the partnership of Ponting/Hussey. Harmison's pace and bounce troubled Hussey to the point where he called through a clearly surprised captain to disaster and the game changed.
• Why didn't Ponting pick Hauritz? this question may haunt him for a while (alongside the 2005 Edgebaston decision to bowl first) and it should. The Oval is the equivalent of the SCG and you ignore its spin-friendly surface at your peril.

• Andrew Flintoff played his final test match and ends his test career with:
• 79 matches
• 3845 runs @ 31.77 including 5 hundreds/26 half-centuries
• 226 wickets @ 32.78 with 3 five-wicket hauls
• 52 catches
• He may have had a quiet test match (just 1 wicket and 29 runs) but instead of delivering the Ashes home with a stirring performance, he could sit back and watch his successor rise to the challenge.

Congratulations England. Given the decline in Australian cricket of late, you need not fear a 5-0 result in 2010

Fourth ASHES Test (Headingly)

What little hair Geoffrey Boycott or any self-respecting Yorkshireman had left is now gone after watching their English team fail to respect the discipline required to win games at Headingly. The batsmen showed no patience and the bowlers even less.

FIRST INNINGS
England 102-10
Prior 37*
Siddle 5-21 and Clark 3-18

The fact that 8/10 Englishmen were caught behind the wicket tells the story. Although Siddle cashed in, the respect should go to Clark who showed great control and got rid of an obdurate Cook when he was set. The game plan was simple; bowl full and let the conditions do the rest. You would have thought that a similar game plan would be employed by the English bowlers.

SECOND INNINGS
Australia 445-10
North 110
Clarke 93
Ponting 78

Broad 6-91

In seasons to come, teams will look at this game and say 'bowl full like Aus not short like the Poms'. The other bowling figures of note are "Anderson 0-89 (off 18 overs)" who should have found this ground paradise but refused to bowl full. I give credit to Broad for persevering but the half-trackers delivered to Ponting and Clarke by most of the attack got what they deserved

THIRD INNINGS
England 263-10
Swann 62
Broad 61
Johnson 5-69 and Hilfenhaus 4-60

At 5-78 at the end of Day Two there was no real hope for England and Johnson used the exercise to build form for The Oval.

Here's some points to ponder:

• Why was Harmison picked for a pitch where a full length was required?
• If he was there for aggression then why did the other bowlers, Onions and Anderson in particular, not bowl full?
• How has Collingwood remained in this team? It takes little time to deduce his weakness to leg-cutters/out-swingers it's amazing that only Stuart Clark has a hold over him
• Most of all, are England choking?

OVERALL:
Despite my respect for Shane Warne's cricket ability, his commentating needs work - especially when it comes to bias! I'm not talking about his bias towards spin bowlers but his apparent dislike of Billy Bowden who fell victim to some of the most insistent umpire-bashing I have heard in a commentary box. I know Australians don't like him but commentary deserves better; leave your prejudice at the door Shane.

The match lasted just two and a half days (shorter than those victories in 2001) but at least now things move to The Oval at 1-1

Third ASHES Test (Edgbaston)

The weather prevented this Edgbaston test match from becoming a thriller so here is a brief summary of the match:

FIRST INNINGS
Australia 263-10
Watson 62
Anderson 5-80 and Onions 4-58

A promising start was ruined by some classical swing-bowling early on Day Two by the mentioned bowlers and any momentum obtained by Watson's knock was gone. James Anderson's delivery to bowl Manou was particularly good

SECOND INNINGS
England 376-10
Flintoff 74 and Strauss 69
Hilfenhaus 4-109

After reducing England to just 168-5 Flintoff lifted the score to a point where England couldn't lose the match - hitting his 20th six at this ground in the process. The best innings was really Strauss though who seems in form equal to Michael Clarke and their batting could be a deciding factor in the remaining tests

THIRD INNINGS
Australia 375-5
Clarke 103 and North 96
Broad 2-38

After dismissing Ponting with a brilliant off-spinner, Swann proved unable to run through the Australians on Day Five and Clarke and North cashed in while saving the match.


While the result suggests a boring game there are a few points to take out of this test that may influence the crucial game at Headingly on Friday:

• The choice to drop Hughes for Watson as a balancing move to aid the bowling attack did not work. Although Watson got runs (62 and 53) his bowling was pathetic and Hughes should feel aggrieved to have missed batting on a pitch with little threatening bounce
• Furthermore, the need for another bowler may not be required as Mitchell Johnson appears to be finding his feet (he should have got Bell 2 1/2 times!)
• England will be worrying about Flintoff who didn't take a wicket and only bowled 15 overs in the last innings. Strauss did reveal his bowling would have been wasted in the swing-friendly conditions, but if he is injured the attack loses its most aggressive weapon (although Harmison is waiting in the wings)
• Strauss and Clarke continue to carry the batting for their teams and their scores at Headingly and The Oval will be important

OVERALL I noticed that many of the Australians began to find form in this game (Hussey, Johnson etc) and if Flintoff is out the momentum could be shifting. Hopefully weather will hinder little of the remaining tests