I hate being a cricket lover. Odi et amo...
I feel rotten right now. I really wish I wasn't an England cricket supporter, but I am, and thus I have to get out of this black despair and wonder what we can do about having been thrashed by one of the great sides.
So I think I need to look at three things - what England couldn't control, what they could, and what changes are needed for the future.
Factors beyond England's control
Australia's side was much older, harder and more experienced than England's. All of the fulcrum players (Hayden, Ponting, Gilchrist, Warne, McGrath, Lee) were available, and all of them were on form. Australia felt they had to win this 2006-7 series as a matter of national pride, and started preparation for it as soon as the 2005 series had ended. At the time, some of the measures they undertook, the jungle boot camps and the like, were derided by the press. But these steps have given the side a truly remarkable steel and resilience.
Remember that the 2005 Ashes win by England, the over-reactions to which prompted Shane Warne's sledging of Paul Collingwood, was against an Australian side lacking Glenn McGrath for much of the series and having weaknesses in the middle-order batting (Martyn, Gilchrist and Clarke all out of form) and the first-change bowling (remember how Flintoff and Pietersen destroyed Gillespie, Tait and Kasprowicz). There were no such weak links in this side; indeed, I would suggest that major architects of the victory were two Ashes debutants, Stuart Clark, "Son of Glenn", and Mike "Mr Cricket" Hussey.
England players - Vaughan, Simon Jones and Trescothick - were unavailable through injury or mental illness. Flintoff played with an injury all series. Also, this forced inexperienced or out-of-form players to play their first games in Australian conditions, often with disastrous consequences (Geraint Jones, Giles, Mehmood).
Factors within England's control
Giving the captaincy to Flintoff. Captaining against the best side in the world demands not only a fine cricketing brain, which Flintoff has, but the energy to lead 100% of the time. An allrounder, especially a seam-bowling allrounder, has too much to do and so should not have such energy available to him; this is why, in Vaughan's absence, I would unhesitatingly have picked Strauss as captain and, in Botham's words, "let Freddie be Freddie". The finest allrounder captains were Richie Benaud and Ray Illingworth (both spinners who could bat), and the exceptional Imran Khan. Gary Sobers was never a great captain; neither were Kapil Dev or Tony Greig. Keith Miller never captained Australia in Tests.
Not bowling with discipline - a Test-class bowler must be able to put the ball where he wants to at least five times out of six. On this evidence, the only England bowlers who can do this essential, routine task are Flintoff, Hoggard and Panesar.
Mis-arranging the batting order. Having left-handers batting with right is vital; even bowlers with great control of line bowl bread-and-butter legside balls more frequently to such combinations. As such, I would have opened the batting with Ian Bell (despite his off-stump weakness, now largely corrected) and moved the still-inexperienced Cook down to No. 3. Similarly, lower-down, perm four from Anderson and Panesar (left) and Hoggard, Harmison and Mehmood (right). Anderson bats at No. 11, but to me does not look as much of a mug as Sajid Mehmood.
Playing stupid shots - too many top-order England batsmen wafted at wide balls or pulled straight to midwicket, perhaps because of the pressure created by the relentlessly accurate Australian bowling. Would Owais Shah or Robert Key have made any difference? Perhaps, but probably not.
Future changes
It would be easy to demand wholesale changes to the side, and I'm sure the Sun is screaming for them as we speak. As Nasser Hussain has observed, with his usual trenchant acuity, it is much more difficult to establish whether the changes people propose would bring any better cricketers to the side. The side picked by the selectors was widely acknowledged to be the best available, with the possible exception of Geraint "I am Duncan's Bitch" Jones.
The clearest need for team change is in the middle-order batting - positions 6, 7 and 8. While recognising that one does not find a Gilchrist or a Kallis overnight, there ARE things that can be done. Unfortunately, Chris Read still has a weakness against top-class fast bowling which means I am unwilling to play him in the side, fine keeper though he is. Equally, Flintoff is perhaps one place too high at 6. It's not as if we don't have alternatives, and I suggest some below:
Wicketkeepers: There are plenty of alleged keeper-batsmen in English cricket. Steve Davies of Worcestershire is regarded as only a year away from batting at 6 and keeping in Tests. I don't think Matt Prior is the answer, as his keeping does not appear up to scratch. Whatever happened to James Foster? If more experience is sought, what about Jon Batty or Luke Sutton as stop-gaps?
As for bowlers, both Stuart Broad and Chris Tremlett need an airing, and they can both allegedly bat. Don't forget the young and highly impressive leg-spinning allrounder (wow! what a prospect!) Adil Rashid of Yorkshire. He could one day be the wrist-spinner England craves, and appears to be no mug with the bat (current averages 19.6 with the bat, 25.1 with the ball). He needs careful nurturing, a couple more seasons of county cricket, and blooding against one of the weaker sides to gain confidence. Let him not be another Chris Schofield. Until Rashid comes of age, why not concentrate on improving the bowling of Alex Loudon and Jamie Dalrymple, both of whom are known to be able to bat at 6 or 7?
More fundamentally, the departure (defection? return? Depends how you look at it) of Troy Cooley to Australia holed England's bowling assets below the waterline. The combination of Kevin Shine and Flintoff is unable to hold Harmison's fragile action and temperament together in the way that Vaughan and Cooley could. Cooley will have passed on all his knowledge to the Australian back room. Similarly, what has Matthew Maynard done to improve batting techniques? Possibly Bell?
I am still undecided about whether Duncan Fletcher should depart.
The silver lining?
We won't be playing against two true greats - Warne and McGrath - any longer. Phew. Let's just hope that Mitchell Johnson won't turn out to be as good as everyone believes he is.
So I think I need to look at three things - what England couldn't control, what they could, and what changes are needed for the future.
Factors beyond England's control
Australia's side was much older, harder and more experienced than England's. All of the fulcrum players (Hayden, Ponting, Gilchrist, Warne, McGrath, Lee) were available, and all of them were on form. Australia felt they had to win this 2006-7 series as a matter of national pride, and started preparation for it as soon as the 2005 series had ended. At the time, some of the measures they undertook, the jungle boot camps and the like, were derided by the press. But these steps have given the side a truly remarkable steel and resilience.
Remember that the 2005 Ashes win by England, the over-reactions to which prompted Shane Warne's sledging of Paul Collingwood, was against an Australian side lacking Glenn McGrath for much of the series and having weaknesses in the middle-order batting (Martyn, Gilchrist and Clarke all out of form) and the first-change bowling (remember how Flintoff and Pietersen destroyed Gillespie, Tait and Kasprowicz). There were no such weak links in this side; indeed, I would suggest that major architects of the victory were two Ashes debutants, Stuart Clark, "Son of Glenn", and Mike "Mr Cricket" Hussey.
England players - Vaughan, Simon Jones and Trescothick - were unavailable through injury or mental illness. Flintoff played with an injury all series. Also, this forced inexperienced or out-of-form players to play their first games in Australian conditions, often with disastrous consequences (Geraint Jones, Giles, Mehmood).
Factors within England's control
Giving the captaincy to Flintoff. Captaining against the best side in the world demands not only a fine cricketing brain, which Flintoff has, but the energy to lead 100% of the time. An allrounder, especially a seam-bowling allrounder, has too much to do and so should not have such energy available to him; this is why, in Vaughan's absence, I would unhesitatingly have picked Strauss as captain and, in Botham's words, "let Freddie be Freddie". The finest allrounder captains were Richie Benaud and Ray Illingworth (both spinners who could bat), and the exceptional Imran Khan. Gary Sobers was never a great captain; neither were Kapil Dev or Tony Greig. Keith Miller never captained Australia in Tests.
Not bowling with discipline - a Test-class bowler must be able to put the ball where he wants to at least five times out of six. On this evidence, the only England bowlers who can do this essential, routine task are Flintoff, Hoggard and Panesar.
Mis-arranging the batting order. Having left-handers batting with right is vital; even bowlers with great control of line bowl bread-and-butter legside balls more frequently to such combinations. As such, I would have opened the batting with Ian Bell (despite his off-stump weakness, now largely corrected) and moved the still-inexperienced Cook down to No. 3. Similarly, lower-down, perm four from Anderson and Panesar (left) and Hoggard, Harmison and Mehmood (right). Anderson bats at No. 11, but to me does not look as much of a mug as Sajid Mehmood.
Playing stupid shots - too many top-order England batsmen wafted at wide balls or pulled straight to midwicket, perhaps because of the pressure created by the relentlessly accurate Australian bowling. Would Owais Shah or Robert Key have made any difference? Perhaps, but probably not.
Future changes
It would be easy to demand wholesale changes to the side, and I'm sure the Sun is screaming for them as we speak. As Nasser Hussain has observed, with his usual trenchant acuity, it is much more difficult to establish whether the changes people propose would bring any better cricketers to the side. The side picked by the selectors was widely acknowledged to be the best available, with the possible exception of Geraint "I am Duncan's Bitch" Jones.
The clearest need for team change is in the middle-order batting - positions 6, 7 and 8. While recognising that one does not find a Gilchrist or a Kallis overnight, there ARE things that can be done. Unfortunately, Chris Read still has a weakness against top-class fast bowling which means I am unwilling to play him in the side, fine keeper though he is. Equally, Flintoff is perhaps one place too high at 6. It's not as if we don't have alternatives, and I suggest some below:
Wicketkeepers: There are plenty of alleged keeper-batsmen in English cricket. Steve Davies of Worcestershire is regarded as only a year away from batting at 6 and keeping in Tests. I don't think Matt Prior is the answer, as his keeping does not appear up to scratch. Whatever happened to James Foster? If more experience is sought, what about Jon Batty or Luke Sutton as stop-gaps?
As for bowlers, both Stuart Broad and Chris Tremlett need an airing, and they can both allegedly bat. Don't forget the young and highly impressive leg-spinning allrounder (wow! what a prospect!) Adil Rashid of Yorkshire. He could one day be the wrist-spinner England craves, and appears to be no mug with the bat (current averages 19.6 with the bat, 25.1 with the ball). He needs careful nurturing, a couple more seasons of county cricket, and blooding against one of the weaker sides to gain confidence. Let him not be another Chris Schofield. Until Rashid comes of age, why not concentrate on improving the bowling of Alex Loudon and Jamie Dalrymple, both of whom are known to be able to bat at 6 or 7?
More fundamentally, the departure (defection? return? Depends how you look at it) of Troy Cooley to Australia holed England's bowling assets below the waterline. The combination of Kevin Shine and Flintoff is unable to hold Harmison's fragile action and temperament together in the way that Vaughan and Cooley could. Cooley will have passed on all his knowledge to the Australian back room. Similarly, what has Matthew Maynard done to improve batting techniques? Possibly Bell?
I am still undecided about whether Duncan Fletcher should depart.
The silver lining?
We won't be playing against two true greats - Warne and McGrath - any longer. Phew. Let's just hope that Mitchell Johnson won't turn out to be as good as everyone believes he is.