Monday 26 August 2013

Ashes 2013: how Australia can pull off unlikely Test win

Flower is due to give a press conference when the present series ends at the Kia Oval later today, when he will be asked about a claim in a Sunday newspaper that he will be replaced by England 20-and-50-over coach Ashley Giles.

The report in the Sunday People said Flower has agreed with the England and Wales Cricket Board that he will step down after the series in Australia, when he will be trying to oversee a fourth Ashes victory since becoming England head coach in April 2009.

The speculation over his future comes even though England need only to lose fewer than 16 wickets today to equal their best result in an Ashes series at home.

Moreover, when England won 3-0 in 1977, Australian cricket was in a state of serious schism because half of their team had signed for the World Series and the other half had not, while in 1886 Australian cricket had no national governing body to organise and select their team.

This series is not quite over yet, however, because a minimum of 98 overs are scheduled for the final day, and the very prospect of going down as the equal-biggest losers in their history will spur Michael Clarke's Australia to produce one last effort.

Australia first have to prevent England scoring 46 more runs to reach their follow-on target of 293. After the pitch has been under cover for two nights and yesterday's washout, Australia's pace bowlers are likely to find it a suitable morning for swing and seam, so Ian Bell's job is not yet completed even though he is averaging 75.

The rest of England's batting consists of two debutants in Chris Woakes and Simon Kerrigan, a wicketkeeper who has scored 86 runs in this series, and the two older heads of Stuart Broad and Graeme Swann. As the self-styled engine room of this England side, Matt Prior, Broad and Swann need to rev up this morning for England to finish on a high note.

After conceding 30 in his first five overs, Woakes has settled in as the game has gone on. Kerrigan's chance of redemption lies in England saving the follow-on handsomely, then Australia batting out the last few overs without anything left to play for, when he would have the chance of a rehabilitating bowl.

Even so, England's selection here has been proved wrong: the intention, without question, was to pick the 11 best equipped in the selectors' opinion to win this match, but the consequence was to throw an added weight on to the shoulders of James Anderson, just as the selection of Steve Finn ahead of Tim Bresnan did in the opening Test at Trent Bridge, Bresnan's most successful ground.

If England only just save the follow-on, Clarke would still have one last dice to throw in his attempt to avoid doing down in Australian history alongside Greg Chappell and Hugh Scott, his two unillustrious predecessors.

Ten to 20 overs of hitting by David Warner and Shane Watson would then give Clarke enough runs to set a declaration, and the best part of two sessions to bowl England out a second time. Anderson and Broad would slow England's overrate down, but not so much as to risk a penalty for their captain, Alastair Cook.

However low that declaration target is, England will not be keen to embark on a run chase. But having been criticised widely for their defensiveness in this match - Australia's debutant James Faulkner suggested last night that spectators on Friday should be given their money back - there could come a point when England would feel embarrassed not to chase: if Clarke sets 200 in 60 overs, for example, they might feel obliged to have a go.

Yet the luck in this series is forecast to favour England until the very last as showers are predicted. The pattern has been astonishingly consistent: when England have won the toss and batted first, they have won, but when Australia have won the toss and piled up a big total, rain has helped England to draw.

If England do avoid defeat today, they will go second in the ICC Test rankings; Australia will go fifth, whatever today's result.


View the original article here

No comments:

Post a Comment