10 Reasons Why We Lost the Ashes

Right. This is really a response to Simon Hughes' observations in the 2006 edition of the Wisden Cricketer' Almanack. The book is the equivalent of the Bible to sad anoraks like me. In Hughes' article (entitled "Ten reasons why England won* [In no particular order]) he states his claim that the reasons why we won in 2005 and regained that strange little urn were as follows:

1.Captaincy
2. Batting First
3. Central Contracts
4.Troy Cooley & the Fast Bowlers
5. Flintoff's Dominance of Gilchrest
6. Kevin Pietersen & Merlyn
7. The Age Gap
8. Australian Arrogance
9. The Siege Mentality
10. Billy Bowden

Ok. Let me get it straight from the start. Simon Hughes is one of the few cricket analysts who actually has something sensible to say. I like him. I confess that I have addressed some of his points earlier on in this blog. I do like him...really. However, those points qualified, I will take him to task on certain points. But that's for later. right now here's the ten reasons we lost the Ashes:

1. Captaincy: Andrew Flintoff is great. I love him. Prior to the start of this series my wife (who is a real cricket fan) said that Freddie shouldn't be captain and that Strauss should. At the time I disagreed with her and stated that AF should lead the team because the Aussie's feared him and would crumble as a result. I was wrong. How many many times I have had to admit this is unbelievable...but it's true. Freddie is a big guy, big personality (and God knows that cricket lacks real characters) and a fantastic talisman, but he is not a leader of men. It was very unusual for Selectors to change a winning captain. Strauss has not lost a Test match as captain. And, in the absence of MV, Andrew Strauss should have led the team. He has a decent cricket brain. So, on this point I agree with Mr Hughes.

2. Batting First: I have no idea what the stats say about batting first but I suspect that the vast majority of Test sides batting first generally win. England, however, have a tendency to buck that trend. At Adelaide England won the toss and batted first. They declared on 551 for 6 and still lost the match. Undoubtedly the decision by Ricky Ponting to field after winning the toss at Edgbaston in 2005 helped England win the Ashes. But can the toss hold such strong sway? I'm not so sure it can. England are a good side but failed to capitalise even when winning the toss. This wasn't because Australia were a lot better but because were we much worse.

3. Central Contacts: This is a bit of a nonsense. Simon Hughes suggests that these contracts helped England win. The real issue at stake is that if our Test players only play Test matches then they are lacking real experience. The every day experience that made players like Randall, Botham & Willis (who managed to play for both county and country) is missing from the current England line up. And what good does is really do players like Dalrymple, Lewis and Joyce who are sequestered to the squad only to be released on the first day or asked to hang around and hand out Lucozade Sport to unfit and inferior players?

4. Troy Cooley: Now, we are close to the bone here. Why did we let him go? Surely the ECB could have offered him more money? He did make the difference in 2005. He inspired the bowlers. But these guys are pros. And if that is true they should have been able to carry that inspiration forward and in the process inspire others. We miss Cooley. It is an outrage that we ever let him go.

5. Flintoff & Gilchrest: In 2005 Gilchrest was out of form. In truth out of 9 innings Freddie did get him out 4 times. However, the real reason was more metaphoric. It wasn't Freddie that dominated Gilchrest, it was England's attack that dominated the key Aussie batsmen. We lost this series because we failed to dominate any of their batsmen consistently.

6. KP & Merlyn: Well, this guy is great. Team player or not he is fearless and that is what wins Test matches. We lost this series because we failed to take our batting to the Aussie bowlers. Warne isn't any better than he was in 2005. In 2005 he took 40 wickets against us and was still on the losing side. So far in this current series he has only taken 21. Against Warne only a couple of our bats have really taken the game to him. We need attacking bats like KP. Freddie needs to remember that he was once the same as KP (remember him placing a six into his Dad's hands?). Form is temporary; class is permanent.

7. The Age Gap: Obviously this series has proved that age is unimportant. Those Aussie stars that have really shined have all been older than their counterparts. We didn't win in 2005 because we were younger. We won because the skipper made better use of his players in the same way that RP has done so this series. Dad's Army they might be, better than us they are.

8. Arrogance: If there was any reason that won the Ashes for England it was the Aussie's arrogance. They turned up here and expected to win easily because they were the best in the world. England, however, didn't go to Oz with the same attitude. They went looking for a drawn series and retention. Arrogance does help. Look at KP. Take away his ego and his edge is blunted. But we didn't lose this series because we lacked arrogance...we lost because we were poorly prepared and didn't come for a fight.

9. The Siege Mentality: The Australians struggled in England because of the overwhelming support for England from both public and press. As the series went on the increased interest in England's progress was astonishing. I don't think England have suffered in the same way down under. We simply turned up to a gun fight brandishing a blunt knife. Ponting was determined to win at all costs in the same way that Vaughan was in 2005. The Aussie's didn't need a Siege Mentality because England didn't want to fight.

10. Billy Bowden: Why mention him now? Because it's not about one man. It's about umpiring in general. I am a great traditionalist of the game. I believe that its continuity should be maintained but when it comes to umpiring why not use technology to make the game fairer? After all, (and I speak as someone who does plenty of umpiring every weekend of the summer) it's bloody hard work making sure the bowler doesn't tamper with the ball, step over the line or bend his arm without having to judge if the ball pitched in line, whether the bat was playing a genuine stroke or if the ball would have gone on to hit the stumps. Let the no-ball judgement be made by the 3rd umpire. This series has seen a few bad decisions but no more than any other series. Hughes harped on about the Kasprowicz at Birmingham (his hand that made contact with the ball was not actually on the bat at time of contact and therefore 'Not Out') but even the victim himself said he would have given it out. Umpiring is not the reason we lost this series.

Quite simply we lost because we failed to believe that Australia would learn any lessons from 2005. They did. We lost because we gambled on semi-fit players. We lost because we failed to attack with bat and ball. And we lost because we went there looking for a draw. Had we gone looking for a fight we would have got one...and we might even have won!