Worse Days

England have had worse days – indeed they’ve had worse days in the past year… just! (It was a day short of a year ago (August 13th 2014) when they were bowled out for 92 by India at Wormsley.) But if this wasn’t a new low, it still plumbed awfully close to those depths.

It wasn’t so much the score – 168 certainly isn’t a number which comes with embarrassment automatically attached. It was more the manner of the performance that was just so abject. Lauren Winfield got a very good ball; but that aside, the Australians weren’t especially good; it’s simply that England were, frankly, pretty bad.

Pressure

The key to England’s shocker was their inability to deal with pressure. And the pressure was certainly upon them quite soon after lunch, as Sarah Taylor fell 100 runs short of that elusive maiden Test century to leave the side reeling at 7/2.

That brought Edwards to the crease and she alone among England’s batsmen looked comfortable out there, because she has the experience and the temperament to deal with Test cricket, which all the rest of the top-order seem to lack once they actually get out into the middle.

(And you have to ask again why Edwards wasn’t opening? Especially given that she basically did open today… just with 2 wickets already down!)

After Edwards departed, the only other England player who made any real headway with the bat in terms of strike-rate was a bowler – top-scorer Katherine Brunt. Why? Because by the time she came in England were already stuffed, so there was no pressure – she could play with a freedom apparently beyond everyone else higher up the order, whose collective strike-rates averaged just 23. (Which is fine if you stay in for 50 overs… but somewhat less fine if it’s more like 50 balls.)

Brunt v Jonassen

I think it is safe to say these two won’t be going on a hot date any time soon – there was a definite “daggers-at-dawn” moment from Katherine Brunt yesterday, which Jess Jonassen laughed off at the time; but it was Brunt who had the last laugh first thing this morning, clearly taking much pleasure in depriving “JJ” of her début century; and again in the late afternoon, as she came down the track and dispatched the Aussie spinner over mid on to give England’s supporters at least something to cheer about in what was otherwise as depressing a day as I can remember.

Lightning Once… Lightning Twice

The result against India last summer could be written off by England fans at the time as a freak. But lightning now seems to be striking for a second time – it is almost as if someone up there doesn’t like us; and it isn’t much fun.

Bowl The Australians Out For Under 300

Having had their declaration plans thwarted by Charlotte Edwards pulling back the new ball field last night, Australia will be keen to wrestle back the initiative – push on past 300 in the first hour, then declare. For their part, England must be desperate to stop them – they want to be batting by midday for sure, but on their terms!

Find A Centurion

England can’t afford to concede anything much of a first-innings lead – lets face it, they aren’t going to get Lanning and Perry and Blackwell all out in single-figures again – so they need 300; and 300 is very difficult to get unless someone stands up and scores big runs.

The lesson of Jonassen’s innings yesterday is patience – a word which Sarah Taylor in particular needs tattooed in large, friendly letters on the inside of her brain. The England glove-butler has yet to score even a fifty in 7 Tests, let alone a hundred. Today would be a good day to change that.

Play Day 2 Test Cricket

There was some criticism yesterday on Twitter of the way the game was being played at 2-3 runs per over; but this isn’t a T20 and England would do well to remember that – this is Test cricket, not ice-dancing, and there are no extra points for style. England can’t win the Women’s Ashes today; but they can lose them if they throw their wickets away chasing runs that don’t need to be chased. It is only Day 2 – lets go out and play Day 2 Test cricket!

“Even Stevens”

England quickie Anya Shrubsole’s said afterwards that she felt it was “Even Stevens” at the end of Day 1; and I think she’s basically right – it is nicely poised. England are probably slightly disappointed not to have cleaned-up the tail, while the Australians will be greatly relieved to have reached 268, from a position where a sub-200 total looked a real possibility. There’s everything to play for on Day 2, including personal milestones tantalisingly in-reach for the day’s stars: Shrubsole and Jess Jonassen.

Anya Shrubsole

The cloudy, damp conditions which persisted all day at Canterbury were tailor-made for England’s swing-meister-in-chief, Anya Shrubsole, who took full advantage to take 4/59. Her lines were slightly off earlier on, particularly to the left-handed Bolton, but she came roaring back in her second spell, assisted by some excellent slip-catching from Heather Knight, who bagged two chances which while straightforward were never easy. Like Brunt, Shrubsole looked tired by the end of the day, but she’ll be back tomorrow and fired-up looking for that fifth wicket to get her name on the board.

Jess Jonassen

Although technically a “Test débutante” Jess “JJ” Jonassen has played over 50 internationals for the Southern Stars, so she has plenty of experience which she called upon today in making 95* – her highest international score to date. It wasn’t a faultless innings; and it wasn’t a chanceless innings, but it was exactly what Australia needed to take an under-par total to something which they will feel is very defensible as the pitch starts to work more in favour of the spinners later in the Test.

The Declaration That Wasn’t

Jonassen admitted in the press conference that Australia were looking to declare around half-way through the final session. After the new ball was taken, the message was sent out to “have fun” and look to put enough runs on the board to have a dart at the English openers tonight. However, England wised up to the plan, moved the fielders back, and it wasn’t to be.

It would have been an interesting scenario though – certainly England wouldn’t ideally have wanted to face just a handful of overs tonight; but as it is, we’ll be back tomorrow to see if Jonassen can complete her century and/ or Shrubsole her five-for.

A few brief thoughts on England’s Test squad:

Fran Wilson

Wilson has been rewarded for a solid season with the bat, both for the Academy and for Middlesex. It is a big step up from Division 2 to Division 1 – as Lancashire are proving, having cruised Division 2 last season and completely tanked in Division 1 with basically exactly the same team. In making that step, Wilson has shown the one thing England really need right now: temperament! If she plays (and that is still a big “if”) it will be for that.

Amy Jones

Jones has been very unlucky. Again. (And how many times have we said that?) Her unbeaten century for the Academy, against exactly the same bowlers England will face in the Test, bowling their hearts out because their team isn’t inked-in yet, shows that she has the technique; but yet it all seems to fall apart when she steps into the arena of full international cricket. Why? It can only be a mind thing; and being in and out of the team like a yo-yo, never quite sure of her place, really really can’t be helping!

Alex Hartley

England have missed a trick in not considering Hartley – the best (available) attacking spinner we have at the moment – in a series-situation where (I think… others disagree) that they need to attack. I have an inkling that this is partly because she is perceived as a bit of a “Genuine No. 11” but honestly… if England are selecting their No. 11 partly for her batting, then God help them!

It does also seem that England’s management find it very hard to accept that players can change. Two years ago, Hartley was apparently going nowhere… so as far as England are concerned, she’s still going nowhere! But people do change – they grow up between 19 and 21 – and Hartley is a different player now to the one they (rightly) didn’t rate when they were first discussing who would (and would not) get a contract. England seem to be doing themselves a disservice by not recognising that.

Play Cricket is the official scorecard for the women’s county cricket in this country; but there’s no way to sugar-coat this: it’s not fit for purpose.

Let’s try to look up the stats of England’s surprise Test squad selection, Middlesex’s Fran Wilson – something that quite a lot of journalists are probably trying to do right now.

So… do we mean this Fran Wilson, who plays for Middlesex and averages 32; or this Fran Wilson, who plays for Middlesex and averages 70? Yes… Fran is in there twice – each Fran having played 4 games!

A similar problem (now apparently corrected) occurred earlier this year with Tammy Beaumont, but at least there was a (sort-of) excuse that time: she was listed as “Tammy” and “Tamsin”.

The folks who developed Play Cricket would probably argue that this is “user error” (also known in the trade as a “BCK Exception” – standing for “Between Chair and Keyboard”) but good software doesn’t let users hang themselves like this – it should be checking for similar (or in the case of Fran identical) names when the scorecard is uploaded!

But these aren’t the only problems. Off the top of my head:

• There is no search facility. (Unless I’ve missed it… in which case this is still the developers’ fault!)
• The site is quite literally unusable on an iPhone because the menus are broken.
• The user experience on any tablet or mobile (or indeed any laptop or netbook with a screen-height of 768px or less – i.e. an awful lot of them) is terrible, with nested scroll-bars and a plethora of popups which make back-navigation impossible.

In short, Play Cricket needs to go for a walk.

A long walk.

A “Captain Oates” walk.

Because we’ve got a brand-new Super League coming next year for women’s cricket in England; and it needs an official scorecard that works.

Yesterday Syd suggested that, should England win the toss, they should elect to bowl first in the Test. I think he’s wrong.

First things first: by all accounts, Canterbury is likely to be a good batting wicket. The last 4-day game played there (admittedly back in June) was the tour game between Kent and the Australian men’s team, and it was a run-fest: the Aussies made 507-8 dec. in the first day and a half.

Secondly, while it’s true that England’s bowling is a lot stronger than their batting, it’s also true that the Test format will suit England’s batsmen – who aren’t generally the most aggressive in their approach – much more than the ODI or the T20 format. (This is perhaps best exemplified by Laura “The Wall” Marsh’s 55 off 304 balls in the 2013 Wormsley Test.) If the pitch does look a good ‘un, you’ve surely got to show some faith in England’s batsmen to make runs.

Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, one thing England’s batsmen don’t seem to be naturals at right now is responding to scoreboard pressure. Charlotte Edwards elected to field first at both Bristol and Worcester; both times her side were left chasing pretty mammoth totals and both times they collapsed without even getting close.

England’s bowling attack might be good, but can we really see them knocking over Meg Lanning and Ellyse Perry and Alex “seeing it like a watermelon” Blackwell cheaply on day 1 at Canterbury?

If not, then putting Australia in to bat is almost guaranteed to produce the kind of scoreboard pressure on the second day of the Test which England’s batsmen just don’t seem capable of handling right now.

If we turn to recent history for a minute: Australia won the toss at Wormsley in 2013, chose to bat, and ended Day 1 243-3. It didn’t look great for England; fortunately Heather Knight stepped up to the plate and played the innings of her career to save the match for England. Honestly, based on form in the ODIs, can we really guarantee that anyone would do the same at Canterbury?

England don’t want to be playing catch-up this time around.

Syd thinks that if England bowl, the worst that could happen is that Australia end Day 1 250-0. Yep. But that would be just as much of a disaster as Australia bowling England out on Day 1 and finishing 50-0…because if Australia end Day 1 on 250-0, it’s quite likely akin to England having lost the Ashes.

So there you go Charlotte Edwards…now we’ve really confused you!

But what do you think?

Cricket folklore says that if you win the toss, nine times out of ten you should bat. (And the other time? You should think about it… then bat!)

But when it comes to the Women’s Ashes Test at Canterbury, cricket folklore might just be wrong in England’s case.

Here are 3 reasons why Charlotte Edwards should put Australia in if she has the opportunity:

1. When you’re the underdog (as England surely are) you have to play your best suit first; and England’s bowling is undoubtedly a lot stronger than their batting.
2. The weather on Tuesday looks like being warm and cloudy – swing-friendly conditions which Anya Shrubsole in particular should relish.
3. The wicket at Canterbury probably won’t deteriorate much over the 4 days, and England haven’t got the attacking spinners to take advantage of it in on the final day even if it did, so batting 4th should hold no particular fears.

Oh… and in the immortal words of Lt. Colombo: One more thing!

Say England bowl, what’s the worst that could happen? Australia finish Day 1 on 250/0?

On the other hand if England bat, there is every chance that Australia could finish Day 1 on 50/0… having already bowled England out – and that really would be a disaster!

But what do you think?

(Plus, look out tomorrow for Raf’s Rebuttal™!)

The phrase With every respect… is one of those that often crops up in those social media lists of What English people say; and what they really mean! As in: With no respect whatsoever…

But it really is with every respect that we have to disagree with Charles Dagnall here:

As Martin Woodward quickly pointed out in reply, a draw would leave England needing to win the T20 series 2-1 – something which they only just managed against New Zealand last winter; and which seems a very tall order against the World Champion Australians.

The truth is that the Test is Do Or Die for England – if they win it they will have the momentum, and the prospect of nicking a result in one of the three T20s to retain The Ashes becomes realistic. And let’s be in no doubt, it would be “nicking”: T20 is the Australians strongest format, thanks mostly to the power of their batting, and a 3-0 victory for the Southern Stars is more-than plausible.

So winning the Test has to be England’s aim and (last years crumbling defeat to India notwithstanding) they have some reasons to be hopeful. Winning a Test isn’t about crashing your way to 250 at a Strike Rate of 100 – it’s about taking 20 wickets, and it is England that have the sturdier bowling attack.

Not only are they stronger, England’s bowlers have more red-ball experience than the Australians. All domestic cricket in England was red-ball until this season (Australia’s top-tier domestic competitions have long been all-white-ball) and England have the only bowler in either side who has played a significant amount of competitive red-ball cricket this season – Kate Cross, who has been playing men’s league cricket with some success.

But there is also one key thing standing in England’s way: the pitch! There have been 3 (men’s) county champs games played at the Spitfire Ground this season, two of which were high-scoring draws; plus a tour match where Australia Men made over 500 in their first innings. It goes without saying that if England are going to get a result, they need a bowler-friendly “result” pitch! (So please… someone forward this article to the groundsman at Canterbury!)

—————–

* Of course if England lose the Test, they could technically still retain The Ball** by winning all three T20s; but honestly… see above – Charlotte Edwards is more likely to walk on the moon!

** As everyone on this site knows, the Women’s Ashes trophy is not an Urn!

ECB-ology, like its etymological forefather Kremlinology, is an inexact science. Nevertheless, it seems clear from reading between the lines of today’s Academy squad announcements for next week’s games against Australia, that England have all-but pencilled-in a team for the Women’s Ashes Test, which begins on Tuesday-week.

In (possible!) batting order:

1. Knight
2. Winfield
3. Taylor
4. Edwards
5. Greenway
6. Sciver
7. Brunt
8. Shrubsole
9. Gunn
10. Cross
11. Grundy

Edwards, Knight, Taylor, Sciver and Shrubsole will all be picked unless they are clinically dead… and even then the selectors would probably have a long, hard think! Brunt is also a certainty as long as they think she’ll make it through without injury, and she is looking pretty fit right now, so she is nailed-on too.

Greenway isn’t quite on that list any more, but she had a 50 and a 40 in the ODIs, so she will play as well.

That leaves just 4 question-marks – Winfield, Cross, Gunn and Grundy.

Neither Winfield nor Grundy are in the Academy squads, so unless one of them has “looked funny” at Paul Shaw, they are both “in”, or they would have been given the opportunity to prove themselves against the Southern Stars in those games next week.

Cross was “dropped” for the 3rd ODI, but England were pretty clear that this was more of a positive swap than a negative one, and she is seen as a bit of a red-ball specialist. Indeed she is the only England bowler to have played a significant amount of red-ball cricket this season, having been playing The Other Game in the Lancashire League; so I’m pretty sure she will play.

Finally… Jenny Gunn? The Gunnster is obviously entering the twilight of her career; but she did a job with the ball when she came back into the ODI team that only Jenny Gunn can do; and I just can’t see Charlotte Edwards wanting to go into the Test without her longest-serving and most trusted lieutenant – someone who can bowl a lot of overs with good economy, and was England’s highest run-scorer in last summer’s Test against India.

So there it is! Am I right? We’ll find out next week apparently, but in the meantime have your say below!