"For Smith be averaging over 60 from 57 matches is astounding and testament to a guy who has brilliant hand-eye co-ordination, married with the discipline of someone like Geoffrey Boycott"
Thursday 30 November 2017 10:18, UK
Steve Smith's Brisbane ton highlighted his quality and how England could do with the pace and power of Liam Plunkett, says Mark Butcher...
An underlying question of the day was 'how do you get Steve Smith out?'
England tried everything, including hanging the ball outside off-stump and trying to get him driving to extra-cover but, by and large, he ignored it.
They then bowled straighter at him, packed the leg-side field and tried to get him to flick one round the corner or in the air to midwicket or square leg, but he was able to control that as well.
For someone who moves around the crease as much as he does, the one thing you can catch him out with is real pace - and that's the one thing England are lacking in their line-up.
I was concerned before the tour that they didn't have a bowler capable of roughing up batsmen on flat pitches when the ball had lost its shine and that is how it has panned out - England looking dangerous with the new ball but not so much later on.
If Smith remains as determined as he is not to give his wicket away, England may need to change tack or personnel. Perhaps it's time to look at Liam Plunkett.
When they knew Mark Wood wasn't going to be fit, the one guy for me who should have been the fourth seamer in that team was Plunkett - he is quick, strong and could made things happen with that old Kookaburra ball, with either yorkers or bumpers.
England had two chances to take him on the plane - the second when Steve Finn got injured - and both times they ignored him. I don't understand why.
Plunkett didn't play much four-day cricket for Yorkshire last season but that doesn't matter. He's 32, not a 24-year-old making his way in the game. He's ready for now and it might be the last time he is in contention for spot in an Ashes series.
With a white ball for England he gets people out with reverse swing and by smashing the ball into the middle of the pitch when the seam and shine have gone - he makes batsmen uncomfortable and England don't have that anywhere else.
Smith's innings, though, was magnificent - one of the best under pressure you are likely to see in a series such as this. The only real false shot he played throughout his innings was an uppish top-edge hook just behind square.
He has scored each of 21 Test hundreds since August 2013 and it's an astonishing turnaround for someone who came into the side batting at No 7 or 8 and bowling leg spin.
I remember watching him play for Surrey's second team in the mid-2000s and thinking he was a very good ball striker but I never really considered him anything more than that.
So to be averaging over 60 from 57 matches is astounding and testament to a guy who has brilliant hand-eye co-ordination, married with the discipline of someone like Geoffrey Boycott.
Smith's technique places certain restrictions on the way that he can play but he never strays outside of those and he has on over-my-dead-body attitude. That's not to say he scores slowly, as the speed of his hundred in Brisbane - his slowest in Tests - was an outlier. He is a fabulous player.
I thought Smith's opposite number, Joe Root, captained really superbly again, although it was odd that James Anderson and Stuart Broad did not bowl for 40 minutes with Australia seven down and that he also seemed to have a reluctance to give Moeen Ali a bowl.
Not bowling Jimmy and Stuart - who have nearly 900 Test wickets between them - is either a massive tactical oversight by the think tank or there is an issue, with Jimmy in particular, that we are not being told about. England are sticking to the line right now that there is nothing wrong with Anderson - so if that was the case why didn't he bowl?
Pat Cummins took advantage with a more than useful 42 for Australia and lower order runs could be the difference between the two teams.
England score lots of runs from eight downwards but if you are facing guys upwards of 90mph those guys don't score runs anymore - England's tail was exposed to that pace and they got blown away.
Australia, on the other hand, were not, with no one to intimidate them. That said, Cummins was very disciplined with the bat - and then quick and hostile with the ball late on. He is a cricketer to be reckoned with when fit.
Mark Stoneman did brilliantly to fend Cummins off and end 19 not out. It's what an opener is in there to do - those unglamorous situations where you face six or seven overs at the death and are on a hiding to nothing - but he has passed every test thrown his way.
Mark has been a fantastic player for quite some time, though the numbers didn't always back up his technique and temperament when he was playing on some spicy Durham pitches. The way he plays gives him as good a chance as anyone to succeed at this level.
Andrew Strauss came into the side in his late twenties having played lots of first-class cricket, scored lots of runs - and also been through failure. You need that, you have to mess up to know how to improve. Stoneman has come in even older and it looks the perfect time for him.
The hope now is that he is able to maintain the intensity for long periods of time that Smith showed - that's the challenge for all batsmen. If he gets stuck in, the pitch looks good enough for him to score runs.
England lead by seven but I think Australia are ahead, probably 65-35, maybe even 70-30. That's not to say England can't come fighting back. It's not over yet.
