- Messages
- 22,722
- Reaction score
- 6,608
The Ashes 2023
- Thread starter just
- Start date
Gordon Bennett
First Team Regular
- Messages
- 3,553
- Reaction score
- 3,332
From a spin perspective Leach should keep getting better if he can maintain fitness. After that it looks like Rehan Ahmed has a very bright future.
From a seam perspective we've given a lot of bowlers a test or two in recent years. Potts and Tongue look to have test futures and possibly Sam Curran if he sticks with the format. I'm not sold on either Overton and can't remember Matt Fisher doing anything. There's also Mamhood, Archer and Stone. Surprisingly Sam Cook hasn't got a look in despite averaging 20 in First Class, but perhaps they don't see him as fast enough for test cricket.
From a seam perspective we've given a lot of bowlers a test or two in recent years. Potts and Tongue look to have test futures and possibly Sam Curran if he sticks with the format. I'm not sold on either Overton and can't remember Matt Fisher doing anything. There's also Mamhood, Archer and Stone. Surprisingly Sam Cook hasn't got a look in despite averaging 20 in First Class, but perhaps they don't see him as fast enough for test cricket.
Last edited by a moderator:
just
Legend
- Messages
- 14,806
- Reaction score
- 15,118
Have to give a big hand to the Australian team too for making it such a fantastic contest. I know we call them "cheating Aussies" and they call us "whingeing poms" but that rivalry, the fierce competitive spirit and the incredible history is what makes The Ashes series the biggest draw in test cricket.
Roll on November 2025 down under.
Roll on November 2025 down under.
The Brit
Legend
- Messages
- 12,712
- Reaction score
- 2,611
Our record in oz is appalling and yet we have won a series over there more recently than they have in England.
im sure the Aussies have loved stuffing us three series in a row in oz, but deep down they must be a bit jealous of/or hoping to see the kind of drama/entertainment we get when the series is played in England.
i hope we can actually give them a proper game next time, but as has been flagged, our bowling attack is having a big turnover. In fact, I think I saw a stat that eight of the XI who played in final test were over 30 so we are going to have to find new players in general…most important person is stokes…longer he hangs around the better. Guy is an inspirational captain
im sure the Aussies have loved stuffing us three series in a row in oz, but deep down they must be a bit jealous of/or hoping to see the kind of drama/entertainment we get when the series is played in England.
i hope we can actually give them a proper game next time, but as has been flagged, our bowling attack is having a big turnover. In fact, I think I saw a stat that eight of the XI who played in final test were over 30 so we are going to have to find new players in general…most important person is stokes…longer he hangs around the better. Guy is an inspirational captain
andy
First Team Regular
- Messages
- 4,027
- Reaction score
- 1,942
I think that is a really good point. Credit to the Aussies they did a job this time, but I think the reason we are so jubilant is that we were the better team and we can take it to them over there.
we are focussed on our bowling attack but what have they got ?
I think the differences next series could be with the bat Kawaga (so?) started well but then looked ordinary layer where our batting was at least consistent, Crawley being the leading run maker
Great stuff for the cricket purest which ever way you look at it !
All I can say it is one of the rare occasions in my lifetime I don’t fear the Aussies at all !
I hope I am not made to eat my words !
we are focussed on our bowling attack but what have they got ?
I think the differences next series could be with the bat Kawaga (so?) started well but then looked ordinary layer where our batting was at least consistent, Crawley being the leading run maker
Great stuff for the cricket purest which ever way you look at it !
All I can say it is one of the rare occasions in my lifetime I don’t fear the Aussies at all !
I hope I am not made to eat my words !
just
Legend
- Messages
- 14,806
- Reaction score
- 15,118
DaRick
First Team Squad
- Messages
- 1,900
- Reaction score
- 582
A terrific series. Almost up there with 2005, and certainly better than 2019 in terms of evenness + quality of cricket played.
So disappointed, as an Australian, that our boys couldn't get over the line at the last, but I have to admit that 2-2 is a deserved result. TBH, while I'm annoyed that we didn't win the series, and ENG must be relieved to have not dropped their first series at home since BazBall, ultimately they will be ruing what might have been but for Manchester's weather (Stokes didn't help himself by waiting until Bairstow got a landmark ala Ricky Ponting & Brad Hodge 2005).
You guys should be proud of ENG's efforts - you outplayed us over the last three games and drew the series despite losing Leach beforehand (it was almost like us losing Lyon was the gods wanting a fairer contest LOL), but their players, hands on hearts, will be wishing they could have won back the urn outright. By 2025/26, it will have been over ten years since ENG had the urn.
I do have some criticisms of our play - the bowl first call at The Oval was a defensive move, designed to deny ENG a fourth-innings chase. I dislike defensive moves in general; you put your team on the back foot by doing those. And so that occurred here. Granted, there was cloud cover and we put down five catches in a session, but still.
Indeed, our entire gameplan to ENG was defensive. Give them easy singles but make them work for their runs rather than allowing them to clear the fence all the time. It worked reasonably well at first, since Lyon disrupted their momentum, beating them repeatedly in the flight.
Things went pair-shaped after Lyon went down. Seeing that the short ball had cut down ENG's batting lineup at Lords, Cummins thought it'd be a brilliant idea to try it again at Headingley. It wasn't. It was a GABBA 2021 result - dumb batting, bowling and captaincy contrived to keep ENG in the game and win it. Wood (2023's Archer) was too good for our lower-order though, and Woakes was a revelation. IMO he's still a home specialist, but his use of cloud cover would make Mike Henrick, Dominic Cork or James Anderson himself proud (now there's a guy who needs to retire)!
Having learnt nothing, we tried the same tack for Manchester, only for Cummins to belatedly realise that he wanted ENG to stay out there and reduce the time needed for AUS to bat.
I thought our bowlers lacked their usual control, Starc excepted. Part of the issue was the field placings, part of it was bowling too fast (Hazlewood), and part of it was being rattled by ENG's approach (Cummins/Boland). ENG neutralised Boland brilliantly, BTW. We should have tried Neser as a counterpart for Woakes, but as ever our selectors are too conservative - they only make radical changes when pushed into them. So we got a conservative result (2-2) - we retained the urn and won the WTC but nothing more.
RE our players:
Khawaja (8) - A lynchpin throughout the series. His vigils underlaid our two Ashes victories. Up-and-down in the field, but still much better than he used to be.
Warner (4) - He tried hard, but his eye's going and so he lacks the technique to leave tight bowling. Can't imagine Bancroft (big gap between pad-and-bat ala Greg Blewett), Harris (LOL) or Renshaw (still technically flawed and lacking confidence) doing any better.
Labu (5) - Struggled with his stance and technique, to the point where he was edging balls that he would have left four years ago. Managed 51 and 111 to save the Manchester Test, but his sojourn at The Oval shows that his slump isn't yet over.
Smith (6.5) - Set up our Lord's win, scored two 50's at the Oval, played a daft shot against Moeen Ali at Headingley and...yeah. Not bad, but could've done more.
Head (6.5) - Nothing to separate them, really. Smith was more likely to set up a match, whereas Head could shift the momentum more quickly. Both could be up-and-down, and Head grabbed a couple of wickets to make up for his inferior fielding vs Smith.
Green (3) - Did OK at Edgbaston and contributed little with the ball beyond short crap, though he's still a singular talent in gully! I think his problems are temperamental; he's not a typical counter-attacking #6 in the Marsh/Head mould so he doesn't know whether he should be consolidating or going for it. I'd consider having him open, telling him to play straight, see off the next ten balls and then go for it. PAK do have a useful attack of quicks, so pit Warner against them before easing Green in against the WI.
Marsh (7.5) - Points deducted for not playing all three matches. Great comeback! He smacked 118 in sporting conditions and helped save the Manchester Test. Then he had another poor game at The Oval? Is this the start of a lengthy tenure at #6, or is Mitch flattering to deceive like the Marshes have always done? Maybe horses-for-courses is appropriate. He looked great on a Headingley greentop, but struggled on a 5th day Oval Turner. His technique is tighter than before, so I'm hopeful that he can improve his stats.
Carey (5) - Keeping was generally good, except at The Oval. Batting petered out after performing well at Edgbaston. Really needs mental assistance.
Starc (7.5) - Points deducted for not playing the whole series. Was expensive as always, but he unsettled ENG's batsmen with his pace, bounce and inswing. Ollie Pope would agree. Clumped a few with the bat, as well.
Cummins (6) - He had his moments, and we wouldn't have won without his fighting efforts at Edgbaston, but he lacked his usual control and consistently, and his captaincy ranged from questionable to crap, collapsing under pressure just like Paine did in 2019. I still think Cummins > Paine, but not by as much as I would have hoped. Funnily enough, he was more productive with the bat than he has been for a long time, so that's a saving grace.
Hazlewood (6) - An OK score for an OK series. Was among the wickets and bowled the odd wicket-to-wicket jaffa, but lacked his usual control. Given his fitness record, the end of his Test career awaits unless he reduces his IPL commitments.
Lyon/Murphy (7.5) - Deducted points for not playing the whole series. I put these two together because while Lyon was better, Murphy held his own. Both contributed down the order, albeit Murphy moreso. Lyon has become dangerous in all-conditions because he can use both overspin and sidespin while changing the pace and his angles up. Very shrewed operator. Murphy doesn't generate as much overspin or sidespin, but he uses the angles well and is pretty accurate. Plus he flights the ball a little more than Lyon does (Lyon prefers to fire the ball in).
Boland (2) - Gets 1 for his nightwatchman cameo. ENG found it all too easy to pick him off a length, since while he is accurate, he is not tall. This messed with his head and caused him to lose his natural control.
RE ENG:
Crawley (8) - You can't really argue with his record, but I think too often we enabled his strengths, and that our batsmen tended to bat in harder conditions than yours did. You can only play what's in front of you though, and he did that with aplomb. Still sceptical about him going forward because his technical issues haven't gone away.
Duckett (6.5) - Very up-and-down. Impressed at Lord's, but not so much anywhere else. IMO will struggle against bounce and against more traditional bowling/fielding he's a candidate for an early edge.
Pope (2.5) - Placed him below Green for playing fewer Tests. Averaged about the same without being able to bowl and looked unconvincing against Nathan Lyon yet again.
Root (8.5) - Was up-and-down, but you can't average with a series average of 50. His 118* should have set up a win in the First Test, and his 91 did set one up in the Fifth Test. Can get an extra half point for nipping out some wickets.
Brook (7) - Looks a real find. Always made you nervous. He does have issues against the short ball and arguably outside offstump. Whether or not he can grind when necessary is an open question, but there's real talent there.
Stokes (8.5) - As a captain, he was definitely more astute and creative than Cummins. As a batsman, his 155 at Lords was epic and his 80 helped set up their win at Headingley. But he barely bowled, and I deducted him half a point because of his early declaration in the 1st Test - also spreading the field for Cummins/Lyon in the 1st Test wasn't a wise move.
Bairstow (4.5) - Solely on batting, I'd give him a 7. His 78 at The Oval was crucial. But his keeping was Akmal-standard during the first few Tests, before improving to Buttler-standard during the last two (not saying much). I'd argue that he is somewhat responsible for AUS keeping the urn until at least 2025.
Ali (4) - On paper, his figures don't look great, but he did kickstart Manchester's run fest, and he did nip out some crucial wickets at Headingley and The Oval. I wouldn't say that he necessarily bowled well, but even when he isn't bowling well, he can rip one out of the rough and make something happen.
Woakes (8.5) - Very impressive with bat and ball; miles improved from his 2019 self. If he played all 5 Tests, I'd consider giving him a 10.
Wood (8) - Likewise, albeit marginally less so. At his best, he was just too good for our lower order.
Robinson (6.5) - He was generally serviceable and accurate, but not much more. ENG's attack became so much more dangerous without him in it. Clumped a few runs.
Broad (7.5) - Pretty steady in his last series. Exploited his hold over Warner to the fullest. Ultimately, he went out his way.
Anderson (2) - Utterly anodyne. He's had a remarkable run, but one can't outrun father time forever, Jimmy...
Tongue (N/A) - Showed promise in his one match.
So disappointed, as an Australian, that our boys couldn't get over the line at the last, but I have to admit that 2-2 is a deserved result. TBH, while I'm annoyed that we didn't win the series, and ENG must be relieved to have not dropped their first series at home since BazBall, ultimately they will be ruing what might have been but for Manchester's weather (Stokes didn't help himself by waiting until Bairstow got a landmark ala Ricky Ponting & Brad Hodge 2005).
You guys should be proud of ENG's efforts - you outplayed us over the last three games and drew the series despite losing Leach beforehand (it was almost like us losing Lyon was the gods wanting a fairer contest LOL), but their players, hands on hearts, will be wishing they could have won back the urn outright. By 2025/26, it will have been over ten years since ENG had the urn.
I do have some criticisms of our play - the bowl first call at The Oval was a defensive move, designed to deny ENG a fourth-innings chase. I dislike defensive moves in general; you put your team on the back foot by doing those. And so that occurred here. Granted, there was cloud cover and we put down five catches in a session, but still.
Indeed, our entire gameplan to ENG was defensive. Give them easy singles but make them work for their runs rather than allowing them to clear the fence all the time. It worked reasonably well at first, since Lyon disrupted their momentum, beating them repeatedly in the flight.
Things went pair-shaped after Lyon went down. Seeing that the short ball had cut down ENG's batting lineup at Lords, Cummins thought it'd be a brilliant idea to try it again at Headingley. It wasn't. It was a GABBA 2021 result - dumb batting, bowling and captaincy contrived to keep ENG in the game and win it. Wood (2023's Archer) was too good for our lower-order though, and Woakes was a revelation. IMO he's still a home specialist, but his use of cloud cover would make Mike Henrick, Dominic Cork or James Anderson himself proud (now there's a guy who needs to retire)!
Having learnt nothing, we tried the same tack for Manchester, only for Cummins to belatedly realise that he wanted ENG to stay out there and reduce the time needed for AUS to bat.
I thought our bowlers lacked their usual control, Starc excepted. Part of the issue was the field placings, part of it was bowling too fast (Hazlewood), and part of it was being rattled by ENG's approach (Cummins/Boland). ENG neutralised Boland brilliantly, BTW. We should have tried Neser as a counterpart for Woakes, but as ever our selectors are too conservative - they only make radical changes when pushed into them. So we got a conservative result (2-2) - we retained the urn and won the WTC but nothing more.
RE our players:
Khawaja (8) - A lynchpin throughout the series. His vigils underlaid our two Ashes victories. Up-and-down in the field, but still much better than he used to be.
Warner (4) - He tried hard, but his eye's going and so he lacks the technique to leave tight bowling. Can't imagine Bancroft (big gap between pad-and-bat ala Greg Blewett), Harris (LOL) or Renshaw (still technically flawed and lacking confidence) doing any better.
Labu (5) - Struggled with his stance and technique, to the point where he was edging balls that he would have left four years ago. Managed 51 and 111 to save the Manchester Test, but his sojourn at The Oval shows that his slump isn't yet over.
Smith (6.5) - Set up our Lord's win, scored two 50's at the Oval, played a daft shot against Moeen Ali at Headingley and...yeah. Not bad, but could've done more.
Head (6.5) - Nothing to separate them, really. Smith was more likely to set up a match, whereas Head could shift the momentum more quickly. Both could be up-and-down, and Head grabbed a couple of wickets to make up for his inferior fielding vs Smith.
Green (3) - Did OK at Edgbaston and contributed little with the ball beyond short crap, though he's still a singular talent in gully! I think his problems are temperamental; he's not a typical counter-attacking #6 in the Marsh/Head mould so he doesn't know whether he should be consolidating or going for it. I'd consider having him open, telling him to play straight, see off the next ten balls and then go for it. PAK do have a useful attack of quicks, so pit Warner against them before easing Green in against the WI.
Marsh (7.5) - Points deducted for not playing all three matches. Great comeback! He smacked 118 in sporting conditions and helped save the Manchester Test. Then he had another poor game at The Oval? Is this the start of a lengthy tenure at #6, or is Mitch flattering to deceive like the Marshes have always done? Maybe horses-for-courses is appropriate. He looked great on a Headingley greentop, but struggled on a 5th day Oval Turner. His technique is tighter than before, so I'm hopeful that he can improve his stats.
Carey (5) - Keeping was generally good, except at The Oval. Batting petered out after performing well at Edgbaston. Really needs mental assistance.
Starc (7.5) - Points deducted for not playing the whole series. Was expensive as always, but he unsettled ENG's batsmen with his pace, bounce and inswing. Ollie Pope would agree. Clumped a few with the bat, as well.
Cummins (6) - He had his moments, and we wouldn't have won without his fighting efforts at Edgbaston, but he lacked his usual control and consistently, and his captaincy ranged from questionable to crap, collapsing under pressure just like Paine did in 2019. I still think Cummins > Paine, but not by as much as I would have hoped. Funnily enough, he was more productive with the bat than he has been for a long time, so that's a saving grace.
Hazlewood (6) - An OK score for an OK series. Was among the wickets and bowled the odd wicket-to-wicket jaffa, but lacked his usual control. Given his fitness record, the end of his Test career awaits unless he reduces his IPL commitments.
Lyon/Murphy (7.5) - Deducted points for not playing the whole series. I put these two together because while Lyon was better, Murphy held his own. Both contributed down the order, albeit Murphy moreso. Lyon has become dangerous in all-conditions because he can use both overspin and sidespin while changing the pace and his angles up. Very shrewed operator. Murphy doesn't generate as much overspin or sidespin, but he uses the angles well and is pretty accurate. Plus he flights the ball a little more than Lyon does (Lyon prefers to fire the ball in).
Boland (2) - Gets 1 for his nightwatchman cameo. ENG found it all too easy to pick him off a length, since while he is accurate, he is not tall. This messed with his head and caused him to lose his natural control.
RE ENG:
Crawley (8) - You can't really argue with his record, but I think too often we enabled his strengths, and that our batsmen tended to bat in harder conditions than yours did. You can only play what's in front of you though, and he did that with aplomb. Still sceptical about him going forward because his technical issues haven't gone away.
Duckett (6.5) - Very up-and-down. Impressed at Lord's, but not so much anywhere else. IMO will struggle against bounce and against more traditional bowling/fielding he's a candidate for an early edge.
Pope (2.5) - Placed him below Green for playing fewer Tests. Averaged about the same without being able to bowl and looked unconvincing against Nathan Lyon yet again.
Root (8.5) - Was up-and-down, but you can't average with a series average of 50. His 118* should have set up a win in the First Test, and his 91 did set one up in the Fifth Test. Can get an extra half point for nipping out some wickets.
Brook (7) - Looks a real find. Always made you nervous. He does have issues against the short ball and arguably outside offstump. Whether or not he can grind when necessary is an open question, but there's real talent there.
Stokes (8.5) - As a captain, he was definitely more astute and creative than Cummins. As a batsman, his 155 at Lords was epic and his 80 helped set up their win at Headingley. But he barely bowled, and I deducted him half a point because of his early declaration in the 1st Test - also spreading the field for Cummins/Lyon in the 1st Test wasn't a wise move.
Bairstow (4.5) - Solely on batting, I'd give him a 7. His 78 at The Oval was crucial. But his keeping was Akmal-standard during the first few Tests, before improving to Buttler-standard during the last two (not saying much). I'd argue that he is somewhat responsible for AUS keeping the urn until at least 2025.
Ali (4) - On paper, his figures don't look great, but he did kickstart Manchester's run fest, and he did nip out some crucial wickets at Headingley and The Oval. I wouldn't say that he necessarily bowled well, but even when he isn't bowling well, he can rip one out of the rough and make something happen.
Woakes (8.5) - Very impressive with bat and ball; miles improved from his 2019 self. If he played all 5 Tests, I'd consider giving him a 10.
Wood (8) - Likewise, albeit marginally less so. At his best, he was just too good for our lower order.
Robinson (6.5) - He was generally serviceable and accurate, but not much more. ENG's attack became so much more dangerous without him in it. Clumped a few runs.
Broad (7.5) - Pretty steady in his last series. Exploited his hold over Warner to the fullest. Ultimately, he went out his way.
Anderson (2) - Utterly anodyne. He's had a remarkable run, but one can't outrun father time forever, Jimmy...
Tongue (N/A) - Showed promise in his one match.
DaRick
First Team Squad
- Messages
- 1,900
- Reaction score
- 582
BazBall will be trickier to execute on our larger grounds, and some of your batsmen (Brook/Duckett) have issues against bounce.
If we're smart, we'll produce some nice bouncy roads and push the boundary ropes back a bit.
ENG's chances of winning rest on their ability to find 1) a spinner who can keep an end down (so probably not Leach), 2) a reliably-fit express quick (Wood will probably have retired and who knows with Stone/Archer/Mahmood) and 3) a batting lineup equipped for batting long. I suspect that Bazball was conjured partially because ENG's batsmen aren't that great at batting time.
(People will say that IND didn't have an express quick; I'd argue that Bumrah/Shami were deceptively quick at times, hovering around 140 km/h and pushing 145 km/h.)
Anyway, let's KTBFFH and hope for a better season than the last (oh god, it couldn't be worse, right?)
Last edited by a moderator:
Gordon Bennett
First Team Regular
- Messages
- 3,553
- Reaction score
- 3,332
just
Legend
- Messages
- 14,806
- Reaction score
- 15,118
Some really interesting stats on the Ashes series from Andy Zaltzman.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/66384548
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/66384548