Wrapping up the Ashes 2009.

Our man by the urn, The Worm, offers some honest and thoughtful reflections on the series as a whole.
 
So much has already been written about England’s series victory in the Ashes that it becomes a challenge to be both honest and original 72 hours on. Much has been focussed on the result, asking how and why the series came to pass as it did. But to study history means submitting to chaos while retaining faith in order and meaning; there was no unifying destiny to this series and but for a few moments here and there it would be Australia celebrating a retained urn. Sport is of course about results but results are sometimes the product of a moment or a millimetre.
 
What has passed has passed. These teams were every bit as close as predicted, and the series swung on a few crucial moments. Monty Panesar looked embarrassed to join in the Oval celebrations but in truth his last wicket stand with James Anderson in the first test was as decisive as any contribution to the series outcome. The opening session at Lords was another defining moment, Strauss and Cook wrestling initiative back before Australia’s measly first innings total. But just as the last minute goals are remembered best, so it was Stuart Broad’s thrilling spell on Friday afternoon that finally swung this series into the lap of the home side. But for any of these and we might be focussing on four centurions in an innings in Cardiff, the lawless first morning at Headingley and England’s failing middle order.
 
Yet no matter how well matched the teams were, it was rare to see them both playing at a level. Where one side dominated the other crumbled, more often than not in the first innings of the match. The three results told of heavy wins, heavy losses; 115 runs, an innings and 80 runs, 197 runs. None of the games were close, revealing parity even in the emotional fragility of the sides. Emotionally fragile? Australia? What must Allan Border and Steve Waugh make of this?
 
Much has been made of the disparity in statistics- Australia had the three highest wicket takers of the series and scored eight centuries to England’s two. But these are skewed by Cardiff where Australia achieved half of those three figure totals and took thirteen more wickets than England. Moreover, Anderson, Flintoff, Onions, Broad and Swann each had their moment where they took the initiative and provided match-winning spells. England had four fiver-fers, Australia two. Bowling wins matches, batting provides the platform.
 
The teams differed in their response to underachievement. Australia were too quick to discard Philip Hughes, a fledgling talent upon whom too much was expected. Fifty seven runs in three innings was far from the planned return but Hughes was dropped because the Australians feared that England had found a weakness in his response to the short ball that could not be fixed on this tour. Had they not lost at Lords, they may not have panicked. Shane Watson came in and averaged 48, but with a top score of 62 it never seemed that he had a big score in him, admirably managing to survive the new ball before losing his wicket when he should have pushed on. He fails to convince as a genuine opener.
 
They showed more loyalty to Mitchell Johnson in spite of only one performance of note. This left Brett Lee in the role of team butler and crucially kept Nathan Hauritz out of the Oval team, where the surface made Marcus North look like Shane Warne reincarnated in the body of a golfer. Australia relied on the bowling of the supposed second string - Ben Hilfenhaus throughout and as the series progressed, the impressive, aggressive Peter Siddle. Neither deserves to go home a loser.
 
England stuck with Ravi Bopara until his position became untenable. Pieterson’s injury may have earned him selection in the fourth test but after Headingley the media were right in their unanimous calls for a change. Like Hughes, he will return, and probably for the winter tour to South Africa. Bopara’s failure opened the way for Jonathan Trott’s timely, distinguished, nerveless introduction to test cricket. The Worm is delighted to admit he was wrong in criticising this selection; Trott displayed a refreshing ability to embrace the highest pressure that speaks of a long career in the high middle order. One wonders what this reveals of the South African mentality, thinking back to Pieterson’s self-assured early test innings. Of those who started the series, only Andrew Strauss (born in Johannesburg) showed such consistent steel; playing with purpose throughout the series, Strauss was justly voted England’s most influential player and has earned the lifelong mantle of "Ashes-winning captain". On such things are careers defined, and as an Englishman and Middlesex supporter it is with some pride that The Worm can reflect on the manner in which Strauss has turned his form around since the tour to New Zealand eighteen months ago.
 
Australia still have an enviable middle order; Hussey had a torrid series, unaware of the location of his off stump. His series would have been summed up by his first-baller to Graham Onions on the second morning at Edgbaston but for his brave hundred on the final day. Ponting and Clarke need no justification, while North showed calm once off the mark, likely to score either a duck or a century whilst making worthy contributions with the ball. Crucially, however, the lower order failed with the bat.
 
Matt Prior won the battle of the two wicket keepers, Brad Haddin scored more runs but not at crucial times. Prior played with an authority that belied the criticism that has dogged his test career. Few men in the England side have leadership quality about them; Prior does, and for the first time in his England career he has gone an entire series without looking out of place behind the stumps. He raised his game well. Behind him, Flintoff, Broad and Swann all scored telling runs to compensate for the failures of the higher order. This perhaps was the greatest difference between the two sides, saving England from substandard totals at crucial times. It is a while since England batted down to number nine and if they intend to make good on their claims to reach number 1 status they need a batting all-rounder to replace the leviathan Flintoff.
 
As the sun sets on a curious series, the unanswered questions return. This win is inconclusive and it ends with big doubts over Alastair Cook and Paul Collingwood, both of whom had only one big, if influential, innings. Cook may be redeemed by the lack of obvious openers to replace him, and his questionable standing as vice captain. Collingwood can only be redeemed by his evident value to the team ethic, but his first team status may not last to the winter. Cameos by the faces of ’05 did little to change their stock - Bell was exposed by nerves but still managed important runs, Harmison appeared as a welcome old friend but did nothing to warrant selection over Onions. If not quite a cameo, Flintoff’s role became more peripheral after his moment at Lords although his run-out of Ponting at the Oval was sublime sporting theatre and his celebration a perfect farewell. Come to me, he calls, his teammates and the nation obey.
 
The series enthralled and there were snippets of great quality but it will not live long in the memory as a whole. The nation was gripped at the weekends, but off the terrestrial channels it was noticably missing in the workplace. Remarkably, over twenty two days of intense cricket, the teams have not developed. They are, as the rankings suggest, fourth and fifth in the world and will move on with doubts, England to S Africa and Australia to home series against West Indies and Pakistan. This series suggest they are both international also-rans.