Has the 2023 Ashes dust settled?
It’s been on the keyboard for days; apologies for the delay. Initially I had an 800-word hit-and-run review in mind; now it’s morphed into a ‘short story. There was so much in this Ashes series when you looked above the trees. It’s my hope you enjoy this short version of the ‘short story, which will follow later. Happy Friday everyone.
It’s hard to know if the 2023 Ashes dust has settled now that we are a week or so removed.
“Dust settled”—is merely a metaphorical phrase offered to dampen the embers that remain bright after an all-together antagonistic and tumultuous Ashes.
Before we dig deeper into this series' ins and outs and whether Team England can truly save Test cricket , I believe it is worth calling out a glaring hole in Englands' claims of moral supremacy.
Simply put, when Australia tours England, they are undeniably competitive, whereas when England visits Australia, they are indubitably absent from the contest.
In the last three Ashes series on Australian soil, Team England has recorded 5–0, 4–0, and 4–0 thumpings—and all without government intervention or the likes of Piers Morgan blindly stirring the patriotic pot.
But—and this is a big but—remember this: Englands’ sole goal is to rewrite the Test cricket playbook using their patented Bazball brand. We were told plainly. Results matter little, clearly. And, to go a step or two further, they will in fact save Test cricket by bringing their own brand of entertainment to this listless soul.
How’s that for claiming the moral high ground? Remembering their track record when they are forced to travel the same distance as their visitors.
I would offer that, typically, the audience usually measures entertainment, not the performers. But, hey, this is a revolution.
If you don’t subscribe, that’s OK, but why not? No, really; hit the button below to join. Or, if you do subscribe and feel like supporting me beyond a free subscription, do the same, and I will be forever grateful and in your debt.
There seemed little hope of resolution; till the bitter end, there were utterances of contempt and equally strong grievances from both teams.
For England, cricket chaos held court for most of the series, with Test match normalcy pushed aside with conceited contempt.
Australia, alternatively, decided on a hybrid version, mixing the status quo with more unconventional methods.
When the curtain finally came down at the Oval, it was left to one of the series’ most prickly practitioners to read the last rites, Stuart Broad.
Alex Carey, an unfortunate victim in all this, edged to the petulant Jonny Bairstow, who managed to maintain control of the catch, giving England a deserving series-levelling victory.
What about the exquisite irony for all to wonder at! Broad, Carey, and Bairstow— the infamous Lords triumvirate coming together one last time. A pantomime swan song!
Bairstow has rightly received a good deal of criticism for his level of performance, particularly his wicketkeeping. However, this wasn’t shared by Wisden, who had him in the ‘team of the series’, ahead of Carey. The 'English blinkers' remain firmly in place.
It was nigh on 6.30 p.m. local time—and if Joe Root had his way, there would be another three or four hours to play. This was London, though, not Manchester.
There would be no denying a retiring Stuart Broad.
The bandana-clad pacer had announced his retirement the previous evening, calling stumps on a remarkable career—of all the stats offered, the one that stands out to me is that Broad joins Shane Warne as the only Test cricketers to go past 600 wickets and 3000 runs. An outstanding achievement.
And, you could say Broad stands at the top of their list as he made a Test match century, where Warne didn’t—although, Warne did get as close as you can!
This was a series littered with mistakes, and then there were moments of brilliance. The two contradicted themselves repeatedly, maintaining the narrative of a frustratingly confusing Ashes.
The brilliance resided in several places: Zak Crawley’s speedy and brilliant assault at Old Trafford; Mark Wood's disturbing pace at Headingley; Ben Stokes herculean batting at Lords; and Usman Khawaja’s continued serenity. As for the mistakes, there’s no need to highlight that two highly skilled teams—both with an axe to grind—are bound to induce errors.
So, a 2–2 scoreline, a draw, the result despised most by the Bazball-led English. The visitors retain the Ashes—holding them now since 2017.
In three of the five Tests, Australia contended with unresponsive pitches, clearly tailored towards England’s expansive batting game. Pat Cummins also called incorrectly on four consecutive occasions—England’s decision to bat at Edgbaston now looms as a series-deciding mistake. Given a second chance, there’s little doubt they would reverse that decision.
Add to this Nathan Lyon’s injury, which proved to be a bitter pill for the visitors to swallow, eventually forcing them to play an illogical combination in Manchester. Todd Murphy’s omission was an unforced error on their part.
All in all, Australia was dealt its share of shonky cards.
Across the hall, England were severely handicapped by Ben Stokes inability to bowl and the pre-series injury to left-arm tweaker Jack Leach. For England, playing five bowlers is as important as flashing the first ball of the day through cover at a million miles an hour. Clearly, Stokes injury unbalanced this well-drilled unit.
England will also rue the fact that their premier quick, Mark Wood, sustained an elbow injury while playing in the Indian Premier League (IPL). Very little has been said about Wood’s load management prior to the Ashes. I would hope this ill-judged preparation would be tabled in the reviews.
And, of course, there was the inclement weather in Manchester! Who could forget that?
Umbrage could be equally taken in both camps.
Feeling generous? Great. Why not gift a SpeakingNick subscription to someone who might enjoy the content.
Both sides displayed unwavering perseverance by sticking to their pre-determined plans, which, for me, became the series' guiding light. They pursued this to the point of absolute distraction.
Brendon McCullum and Andrew McDonald are contemporary cricket coaches. Both avoid the "do as I did" mantra, preferring to hand responsibility to the player after arming them with all the information they will need. They share a belief in being prepared and showing trust in their charges.
To me, it's interesting that pundits in Australia still question McDonald's methods while others around the world laud McCullum for this approach.
The cricket world was abuzz with comments about Bazball and whether England could maintain their aggression against an experienced and highly skilled Australian attack. Many suggested—me included—that this approach would be unsustainable.
Well, as Miguel de Cervantes said, "The proof's in the pudding."
Indeed, there was no looking back after—batter of the series—Zak Crawley emphatically cover-drove the series’ first ball for four.
"Put that in your pipe and smoke it."
England’s batting game was unmissable. The scoreboard never stood still; blink and you miss. It was undeniable. While led by the sublime Khawaja, Australia aimed to uphold the traditional virtues of Test match batting, creating a calming sense of orthodoxy amidst the chaos—whatever orthodoxy represents now.
It’s interesting to note that both sides detoured from their respective approaches due to forced selection shifts.
England introduced Chris Woakes at Headingley primarily to lengthen England’s batting and to give Mark Wood some cover by bowling ‘holding overs’, often at difficult times in Australia’s batting innings.
Mitch Marsh received his opportunity at the expense of an injured Cameron Green, presumably due to his excessive ‘bouncer loads’ at Lords. It seemed like Australia undermined Green’s bowling abilities after casting him in an enforcer role.
Woakes had not played a single Test in the Bazball era and his character could not be more at odds with the contrived nuances that the regime demands.
The 34-year-old Woakes brought the austere virtues of stirringly steady seam and swing at a ‘driving-to-the-speed-limit’ pace. His bowling at the Oval was exemplary. Internally frowned upon, but nothing short of exemplary! Woakes cut down Australia’s fourth-innings chase when others around him were flagging.
A thunderous first-innings Headingley century brought Mitch Marsh to the party. Not one to turn down a celebratory invite, Marsh was sublime from ball one and helped craft an excellent partnership with Travis Head.
If Marsh were born in Putney and not Perth, I have no doubt he would find his way into the Bazball sphere.
Both Woakes and Marsh changed the series’ trajectory in their own ways. In Woakes case, the player-of-the-series award from only three games is testament to his immediate and dramatic impact.
Injuries can also help selectors.
And so another Ashes story ends as it began, with uncertainty and intrigue. An epic series full of twists and turns leaves everyone with more questions than answers.
Will the Australian selectors stick with a winning combination? Albeit an ageing one. They are the World Test Champions.
Can England propagate its Bazball approach in their bowling, and how will they fill the holes left by Stuart Broad and, eventually, Jimmy Anderson?
For Australia, will Pat Cummins’ continue as captain? If not, who are the candidates?
How long will Nathan Lyon play? Australia, if they didn’t already, now understand how important Lyon is to their team.
The future is unclear, but one thing is certain: the past gifted us a sensational summer of cricket, showcasing the very best of Test match cricket. More of the same, please.
