England have lost another Ashes series in Australia. If the current form of these two sides continue it will be a third 5-0 loss in four Ashes trips for the English. The defeat in Perth was the seventh successive defeat for England in overseas Tests, having been roundly beaten 4-0 by India last winter. They also struggled against Bangladesh, losing for the first time against that opponent.
Things are not going well for England when they leave the green, green grass of home.
Perhaps the most concerning element of this current spate of defeats is not the number, but the manner of them. Three times in those seven loses England have batted first and made more than 400. Each time they passed that landmark they went on to lose the match by an innings, twice in India and once in Australia. There is the standard excuse about how winning away from home is difficult and that all teams have found life hard when they have ventured away from conditions to which they are suited, but these have been brutal defeats.
And India and Australia are the two places that England have always found the most challenging. When they won in Australia in 2010/11 it was their first overseas Ashes win since 1986/7. When they beat India in 2012 it ended a 26 year wait for a series victory against India away from home. While losing is nothing to be ashamed of, and in those two countries it should be expected, England’s complete inability to compete is the real concern.
Post-mortem of the defeats
After two such chastening winters it is inevitable that there will be a period of navel-gazing. When England lost 5-0 in 2013/14 they fired their best batsman, sacked their most successful coach and alienated a large section of their fan base by using the phrase “outside cricket” to describe those that had been critical of their handling the situation. When that defeat was followed a Test series loss at home to Sri Lanka and a greatest hits collection of white ball cock-ups at the 2014 World T20 and the 2015 World Cup they also dismissed the man who had made all those calls at the end of the 2013/14 Ashes.
Things have undoubtedly got better since that absolute nadir of English cricket. Despite the insistence of the then ECB Chairman, Giles Clarke, they were at a massive low ebb. Since then, they have got to the final the World T20 and the semi-final of the Champions Trophy. They have won the 2015 Ashes and beaten South Africa away. A new lease of life in white ball cricket means they are finally at the cutting edge of tactics and talent in the shorter formats and they are still a very good side in Test cricket at home – they haven’t lost a home series since that Sri Lankan defeat in 2014.
But there is still the problem of how England go about winning away from home, and whether doing so is even a priority for the ECB anyway. Home success and growing the sport through Twenty20 is a bigger priority, and they are probably right to hold these views.
It is hard to think that things have been worse when England have been so poor over successive winters, and the fact that the picture has been grimmer than it is right now doesn’t make these results acceptable.
The reasons
So, the question is why? Why is that England have struggled so badly in both India and Australia over the last two years? The answer is nuanced and complicated. The first and most obvious answer is that in their home conditions both India and Australia are a lot better at cricket than England. Reverse the locations of these contests and England become competitive. Australia have not beaten England in England since 2001. India won in England in 2007 but have been hammered on their last two trips to the UK.
Once again, it comes back to the manner of the defeats. England cricket fans are smart enough to realise that winning away from home against good teams is hard. What they find hard to stomach is getting battered in such an embarrassing fashion. And their righteous anger and indignation will only be more incandescent when it is magnified through the prism of an Ashes series. Rightly or wrongly, many English cricket fans would happily lose almost every series if it meant that they could beat Australia home and away.
The sights of the outrage cannon will always turn towards county cricket. There are undoubtedly issues with the domestic game in England and Wales. The Championship was a hard-fought and hard-nosed competition in the early 2000s. There were more Kolpak (not England qualified) players adding experience. There were no ECB young player bonuses which give counties a financial incentive to play English qualified youngsters. It meant the Championship was never better than in the years leading up to, and immediately after the 2005 Ashes victory.
Still, England went to Australia in 2006/7 and lost 5-0.
Ironically, the moves to restrict Kolpak players and increase the number of youngsters were made in attempt to make the Test team better. Having more England qualified players, and focusing on getting kids more games, was in reaction to a criticism that old men and South African journeymen were keeping the next big Test star out of a county first team and hampering their development. Now the absence of these hugely experienced cricketers is being used as a stick with which to beat county cricket.
The next target will be the National Cricket Performance Centre in Loughborough, or “Bluffborough” as ESPNCricinfo’s George Dobell calls it. This too was created on the back of sustained criticism that England were miles behind Australia who have had a similar facility since 1987.
Founded in 2003, its stated aim is to identify and develop cricketers that can help England win high profile overseas series. The results have been mixed, with the allegation being that bowlers go into this state-of-the-art campus and come out of it worse. The place may or may not work, but the reasoning behind its creation is entirely sound. If it did not exist there would be demands for it to be created.
There are changes that the ECB can make. By having more County Championship cricket in high summer, where the harder pitches will reward fast bowling and spinners who actually spin the ball, could make it easier to identify quick bowlers and spinners. It could in turn mean that the batsman are better at facing quick bowling and spin and therefore, able to score runs in Australia and India.
The problem here is that even when the County Championship was played at the height of summer, England didn’t do well in either of those countries. Just as India struggle to produce a seam bowler that can get the ball to swing at pace, England don’t often have a spinner that is truly world-class. The conditions in the UK, no matter how much cricket is played in July and August, are always going to favour swing bowlers more than out-and-out quick men or spinners.
They could look again at Loughborough and decide that their analysts are getting it wrong, that the science-led approach that looks to find talented cricketers when they are at age group level isn’t working. But that only changes anything if there is the raw material to begin with, and if the county game can be a finishing school for these cricketers.
Lack of spinners and quicks
Think about England teams over the last few decades. They had Graeme Swann, who was a genuinely world class spinner throughout his career. Other than him there were moments when Monty Panesar, Phil Tufnell, Phil Edmonds or John Emburey were very effective, but you have to go all the way back to Derek Underwood to find another spinner who was a consistent match-winner for England.
As far as out and out quick bowlers are concerned, there was the freak team of 2005 that had Freddie Flintoff, Steve Harmison and Simon Jones – all capable of bowling in excess of 90mph, but that was the only time England have had more than one bowler who was express pace in their side at one time. Back in the 1990s Darren Gough was capable of bowling that speed far a small part of his career, Devon Malcolm was rapid but inconsistent. The two of them only ever played seven Tests together.
While England should be doing a lot better than losing 5-0 in Australia again, and there are questions that the players and coaches need to answer, it is unrealistic to expect England to win more than they lose when the deck is so stacked against them.
Under-performing
What fans can and should expect is that the finest cricketers England have, play at their best when in India or Australia. They failed miserably in India. They have not done this during this Ashes series either. England supporters have every reason to be angry. They have every right to expect more. England have played badly, and while they were never going to win in Australia or India with their current personnel they shouldn’t be meekly surrendering.
What they cannot demand is that England select theoretical cricketers or expect them to create them using the materials that they have at their disposal. Sport is, by nature, cyclical, and great teams are built, succeed and fade away. England will win in Australia again, they will get another Test series victory in India, but all the tinkering you can manage isn’t going to make it easy or a regular occurrence.
It is the truly remarkable teams that win away from home on a regular basis. The West Indies of the 1970s and 1980s. The Australians of the 1990s and 2000s. England from 2010 to 2012. South Africa from 2007 to 2015. Otherwise, the best you can hope for is to compete. England need to find a way to do that, and the answers as to how they go about doing so, rest with the cricketers and coaches of the current squad.