First Ashes Test. Edgbaston.

[K]

P. Hayward, The Telegraph, London:

"Labelling a ground 'The Fortress' is asking for trouble. 'The Gabbatoir', it was not. ...

But nobody could have looked at Jos Buttler batting in this first Test and thought England's white-ball heroes were still on a high. Buttler, the buccaneer, simply planted his feet and fell all over a Pat Cummins delivery that bowled him.

Nor could any sensible observer feel that Jonny Bairstow came here cocked and ready for a five-Test marathon. Or Moeen Ali either.
...

Recriminations are pointless, except perhaps in the case of Roy, for whom the modern English cricketer's excuse was written: "This is the way I play." In this context, with a day to grind out a draw, nobody can excuse such a shot by saying they were trying to "get after" the spinner. Not at 1-60.

Across the picture, though, England's depleted bowling attack was a factor in Australia's victory. Jofra Archer was absent, Mark Wood is injured, Anderson lasted four overs and Moeen's confidence is shot. Smith feasted on these inadequacies for his 286 runs and needs to be tested more at Lord's and beyond, particularly by Archer's bounce and pace."

[K]

I agree with Hayward about the effect of the loss of Anderson. Archer, his obvious replacement, should be available for the next Test (and England can hardly complain about missing the services of fake Englishmen who in an ideal cricket world would be playing for other countries they have greater connections to).

But he's wrong about the white-ball players being drained. The white-ball players simply do not have Test-cricket technique. When they do what they always do in Test cricket -- and this on a slow, flat pitch -- it's not mental freshness that's the main issue.


Oz should not kid themselves about their batting. 8/122 against a side one bowler down and with a spinner in crisis... And the broadcast showed the historical stats for this ground. Historically, it's like 40 runs average per wicket on day 4, so that's like 400 is a par total if you get day 4, and 20 runs average per wicket on day 5.

[K]

I. Westbury, The Telegraph, London:

"The numbers, however, painted a miserable picture. By lunch on the final day of this Test, the players had reviewed Wilson's decisions 12 times; eight were overturned and four struck down. Aleem Dar fared only marginally better. The first day alone was unrelenting, eliciting eight umpiring errors - the tone was set.
...

However, sympathy and ridicule alone will not remedy a situation which urgently needs it. Joe Root successfully reviewed an umpire's decision one in every 44 balls he faced across his two innings. For a game requiring such single-minded concentration, this loss of trust took up unwelcome head space.
...

Solutions, then? Ricky Ponting has called for the scrapping of neutral umpires. It makes sense in theory, but emotion, patriotism and sport is often a proxy for much more, which makes native umpires an easy target when excuses are sought. Instead, we should seek the root of the problem.

Why is it that seven of the 12 umpires on the elite panel come from England and Australia, so are thereby ineligible for the Ashes? India are not without means to invest in developing umpires. Should a more significant proportion of each board's spending be mandated to the cause? And for those boards without such funds, is it not integral to the global game that any central investment is spread more widely?

We talk a lot about diversity in sport and this must extend to umpires. The ICC says it is a work in progress, but the process is taking too long. Of the ICC's 53 elite and international umpires, none are women. Diversity is not just a wholesome exercise in good visuals, but core to performance."

[K]

Yeah, scrapping neutral umpires is a bad idea, I reckon.

And I don't know why she (Westbury) thinks diversity is going to improve umpiring. How large is the pool of umpires at all levels now? If it's already large, the problem isn't having too few to draw good ones from.


I don't think she should be blaming the players' poor review decisions on the umpires (as she does). If you inside edge a ball, you should be aware of it, and if you then go and review the umpire's caught decision (as Denly did) that's your own stupidity.

[K]

M. Nicholas:

"The future…
...is bright for Australia and worrying for England. Question marks surround too many of the players for comfort - Joe Denly, Jonny Bairstow and Moeen will watch the media spaces with trepidation. Archer and Curran are givens for Lord's - or should be - while Ben Foakes remains an attractive option. The slope at the old ground is to Mitchell Starc's liking and he may well replace one of James Pattinson or Peter Siddle. Cameron Bancroft will hang on for now but has Marcus Harris treading on his toes."


[I hope Foakes plays, so that they have Stokes, Woakes, Foakes, and so that there are five wicketkeepers in the match --- quantity over quality.]

[K]

Dobell, cricinfo:

"Two changes seem likely ahead of Lord's. Jofra Archer will, fitness permitting, come into the side for the injured James Anderson and Jack Leach will, almost certainly, come into the side in place of Moeen Ali. If Archer is unfit, Olly Stone may be the replacement instead.

But it would be a surprise if England made more than two changes. Not because they shouldn't, but because they will be concerned it would hint at panic. And panic won't help anything.

But some sense of urgency might. And the selectors need to reflect on Denly's performance here and ask whether he is really likely to score the weight of runs required to shape a series at No. 4. Equally, they may reflect on Roy's performance as an opener and ask themselves whether that is the best place for him to bat. And they may ask themselves how they can find a place for Sam Curran in this side."


He also has this to say about the England batting:

"It is a long time since a batsman - a specialist batsman, anyway - has come into the England Test side and shone. Gary Ballance promised to do so for a while but then fell away. Meaning that Joe Root, who made his debut in 2012, is the last to do so. While such a judgement may seem harsh on Jos Buttler, Jonny Bairstow and Ben Stokes, the reality is they average 34.56, 35.70 and 33.76 respectively. By the high standards of Test cricket, that is modest. And it doesn't reflect at all well on the coaching systems or pathways.
...

Consider Joe Denly's innings here. He was beaten by his first two balls from Nathan Lyon; the first resulting in an appeal for a caught behind down the leg-side and the second seeing the ball squeeze between bat and pad and just miss the stumps.

And how did Denly respond? He swept the next two balls for four. They were fine shots, too, and Edgbaston applauded them. But Australia knew they had their man. They knew he was sweeping because he couldn't defend and, within a few minutes, he was gone. For the grim truth is that England have produced a generation of batsmen that don't appear to trust their defensive techniques. Think of Ben Duckett struggling against spin or Keaton Jennings reverse-sweeping because he reasoned it was safer than defending. None of this is new; none of it is a surprise."


[Whether you reckon Stokes has an acceptable batting average probably depends on what you think of his bowling. He has 131 wickets in 53 Tests at an average of 32.18, economy rate of 3.34 and strike rate of 57.7. For comparison, Andrew Flintoff: in 79 Tests, a batting average of 31.77, and 226 wickets at an average of 32.78, economy rate of 2.97 and strike rate of 66.1.]

[K]

Michael Vaughan, The Telegraph, London:

"The problem for this England side is that already they are pondering changes to the team and Australia landed a few psychological blows in the first Test. I worry this could be a very messy series for England and it is important people understand how difficult it is for some of these players to raise themselves after the World Cup.
...

Let's be honest, at Edgbaston it looked like England had only seven players. You can say they had technical deficiencies but I just looked at their mindset and it was not right.
...

To think these players are robots who can turn it on whenever they want and can shut out emotion is nonsense. Over the next week England have to find the ones who are too tired and need a break.
...

A week off doing nothing and thinking they will come back and hit a red ball better is wrong. Facing a red ball is completely different to facing a white one. A white ball does nothing. You can hit through the line with confidence. The red ball nibbles. It moves around and you need a technique to deal with it, move your feet and survive. It is a tough balancing act because Buttler, and one or two others, need a break, but they also have to spend two or three days with the coaches hitting red balls to right what went wrong at Edgbaston.
...

If they are all fit, able and desperate to play I would not make many changes, apart from Jofra Archer for James Anderson. Do not panic. Sam Curran could come in for a batsman and everyone else gets pushed up a spot; he would take the workload off some of the bowlers. Jack Leach can offer that left-arm threat to Steve Smith, too. But I am not one for making big changes after one Test unless their minds are not right. That is the most important thing."



[Nope. I'll say again what I said above. They do not have Test technique. Look at how they went in the WIndies in their previous Test series. You can't blame that on mental fatigue.]

[K]

Keep us neutral, ICC umpires declare

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/27340635/keep-us-neutral-icc-umpires-declare

"... Australian and English voices calling for an end to the neutral umpires system first experimented with by Pakistan in the late 1980s and formalised in 1994 are believed to be very much in the minority at the ICC's various committee tables.

The question of dumping the neutral umpires system, a query raised by Ricky Ponting, Glenn McGrath and Michael Vaughan among others during the Edgbaston Test has been debated more than once over the years, typically around the time of an Ashes series. Most recently the issue was raised at an ICC match officials forum in 2018, and ESPNcricinfo understands that the umpires were not only united but vehement in their opposition to any change.

Put simply, umpires are happier to accept criticism of their decision-making on a basis of skills, conditions, eyesight - just about anything so long as they are not regarded as biased towards one side or favouring their home team. This accusation, which was levied at countless umpires over many years before the introduction of neutral officials in the early 1990s, is not one that any umpires involved in international cricket would like to revisit, and they have the support of the majority of countries at ICC level.
...

In Australia in 1990-91, Phil Tufnell has recounted how an Australian umpire, Peter McConnell, made no secret as to his distaste for the English side. When asked how many balls were left in an over at the MCG, Tufnell recounted McConnell's reply as: "Count 'em yourself you Pommie ****."
...

Similarly to players, umpires are assessed and developed over time, graduating from junior and club ranks to first-class level, then Twenty20 international, ODIs and finally a spot on the 12-man ICC elite panel to officiate primarily in Test matches and major ICC events."

[K]

TV umpires to call front-foot no-balls in ICC trial

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/27332757/tv-umpires-call-front-foot-no-balls-icc-trial

"TV umpires may soon become the sole adjudicators of front-foot no-balls, if planned ICC trials prove successful.

The ICC will identify a number of limited-overs series over the next six months for implementing a system where the TV umpire - and not the on-field umpires - will call no-balls for overstepping. The system has been trialled before, notably in the ODI series between England and Pakistan in 2016, but it will be rolled out on a much broader scale this time.
...

"The cricket committee recommended that we do it in all ODIs and T20Is," he said. "In 2018, there were about 84,000 balls delivered around the world in those formats in men's international cricket. So to monitor the no-ball on each of those deliveries at all of the different venues is a big exercise. We just need to understand all the challenges before implementing this across all matches.

"Can this technology be implemented consistently across the 80 venues that hosted ODIs and T20Is last year? There are different levels of television coverage across these matches, so it will be easier to implement at some matches than at others. We now have 104 members who play T20I cricket and many of their matches are not televised, so what do we do there? Thinking through all of the implications of introducing this is the exercise for us over the next six months."
..."

[K]

Barney Ronay, The Guardian:

"As for Denly, well, perhaps in nine years when he has 25 Test hundreds people will say, can you believe it, they picked him at first as a part time leg-spinner: look at him now, the 42‑year‑old new Bradman. But this will require some fast work.

Jos Buttler, England’s Test No 5, has one hundred to his name in first‑class cricket in the past five years. Here he was bowled trying to defend a ball from Pat Cummins that hit the top of off stump.
...

Plus, of course, this is a structural thing. Don’t call it a hangover. England’s losing start here is not to do with the aftershocks of the World Cup. It’s to do with the pre‑shocks, the pre-effects. For four years this team, the red ball one, has been secondary in planning and resources. Men who were being asked here to bat the day out have been encouraged to whack a white ball into the stands rather than work on gritty defence on English pitches. England’s team here is pegged around explosive white-ball talents: because these are the talents they have."

[Pies4shaw]

You left out the best quote from Barney's article:

" ... some things are now clear. Australia have the best batsman in either team – and indeed the best batsman of the modern era."

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2019/aug/05/england-red-faces-neglecting-test-cricket-ashes-australia

Unless he's talking about Khawaja, he probably means donSteve bradSmith.

[K]

See Trevor B's quote in the T2 thread.

"In either team" is okay, but "modern era" is only true if he defines that as the past week, which would be very modern.

[Jezza]

Watching this test, I realised it was one of best victories the test team has had in years.

Hope it's a sign of things to come for the rest of the tour.

[K]

Well, remember the first Tests in away series against India & S. Africa went a similar way...

(If I found statsguru at all easy to use, I'd try to link the scorecards.)

[Jezza]

^ True, but witnessing Smith's smooth return to test cricket and to see the team turn it around when we struggling early in the test was fantastic.

Made me proud of the test team for the first time in a long time.