Blogs & Opinion

No need to panic

Batting let us down, but can Australia do it again?

Nasser Hussain - Nasser Hussain Posted 20th December 2010 view comments

I wouldn't read too much into England's third Test defeat and certainly as Andrew Strauss has come out and said, it's no cause for panic.

I don't think it was a question of any great change in the Australian side, or any real deficiencies in the England side - it was just a wicket Australia needed.

I've said all along that Australia need a pitch to get 20 wickets on and they provided just the pitch for that; they have got seamers that are going to hit England, the conditions took Graeme Swann out of the equation and they know historically, England have struggled on pitches like Perth.

Strauss: storm clouds gathering? Not according to Nasser

Strauss: storm clouds gathering? Not according to Nasser

They haven't done well at Johannesburg, Headingley a few times and it was a clear plan from the Australians. But they can't do that everywhere, so I wouldn't be too fearful as an Englishman.


I would though, be a little bit worried that they continue to struggle on pitches that do a bit - that is something Andy Flower and Strauss need to address. If they are to become the best side in the world they can't just be a one-dimensional batting line-up.

I thought the England attack did well; to bowl them out for 260 and 300 is a pretty good effort, so there were a lot of good things to take; it's just that the batting line-up let them down and continues to do so on pitches like that, which needs to be addressed.

Nasser Hussain
Quotes of the week

Australia v England

11.30pm, Sat, Sky Sports HD1
Follow the Ashes wherever you are - on Sky Sports HD1, Sky Player, Sky Mobile and

I just think England have played a lot against sides that haven't moved the ball around recently and they came unstuck against Pakistan when it did. They're still a very good batting line-up, they just need to be more disciplined.

They just seem to go big or when it does a bit, they seem to chase wide balls or play across straight ones when really what they need to do is get ugly runs.

They have a batting coach in Graham Gooch who all those years ago got a magnificent 150 at Headingley and he will tell them it's not all about getting runs when conditions suit you. International batsmen have to be able to get runs when conditions don't suit.


I've said it all along, I still believe England will win the series because they have more players in form, but what we had to account for in Perth was Mitchell Johnson.

There's no doubt this guy has the X-Factor and if he delivers again like he did the other day, Australia have got a wicket-taking bowler and everything falls into place for them. Before that if Johnson wasn't particularly good, Australia weren't particularly good.

They needed a leader and they got a leader, but Johnson doesn't turn up all the time and I'm not even sure if he knows what's coming! He needs those conditions, he needs the WACA; I don't think he'll be able to produce that sort of performance all the time.

Having said that, that is the one worry for England going into the rest of the series - that Australia do have someone who can do something special and if he turns up for the next two Tests and bowl the way he did, we could struggle.

But there were still positives to come out of defeat for England. I thought Chris Tremlett was magnificent, I thought the standard of catching and fielding and Matt Prior's wicket-keeping was exceptional, I thought Ian Bell looked a fine player - even if he is batting too low down.


I thought the England attack did well; to bowl them out for 260 and 300 is a pretty good effort, so there were a lot of good things to take; it's just that the batting line-up let them down and continues to do so on pitches like that, which needs to be addressed.

We talked on Sky Sports after the game about maybe changing the batting order to freshen things up and move Bell ahead of Paul Collingwood to five, but I don't think Andy Flower and Andrew Strauss will do that.

I don't think they are prone to changing things mid-series although I don't agree with the captain saying we don't want to panic as such, because I didn't see that change as a sign of panic.

There are good cricketing reasons to make the switch; Bell is a better player than Collingwood right now and is the future to be honest. I am not saying for a moment leave Collingwood out, like some are suggesting; I think he should play the series but right now when it's level with two games to go, you need scrappers like him in there. Also historically, when people have knocked him, Collingwood has responded and I would move him down to number six to get that response.

The other change being mooted surrounds Steven Finn, but I am not so sure it's needed. People outside the team all of a sudden become better bowlers; is Ajmal Shahzad a better bowler than him, is Tim Bresnan? I'm not so sure.

Finn is one of our leading wicket-takers that has bowled on two flat pitches. He didn't bowl particularly well in Perth and he looked a little short of fitness in as much as he's a young lad that still needs strengthening and fitness work, but he's like Stuart Broad was two years ago - erratic. He'll bowl four poor balls but will take wickets.

Only the England set-up will know if Finn is exhausted or not and remember, Swann will come into it far more in Melbourne, so he will get more rest after having being asked to bowl every day in Perth because the batting wasn't good enough.

As a captain I always liked to have a wicket-taker in my side and I wouldn't change the attack. In that respect Strauss is right, it's not time to panic, because until three days ago England were by far the better side in this series.


Looking ahead to Melbourne, no-one knows what to expect until we turn up there. They have changed the pitch but the rumour is it was getting a little dry and they were looking at doing that anyway, but obviously having seen what's happened here there are two things to take into account.

One, they have seen what happens on a green, quick pitch and two, as a groundsman, having seen all the plaudits handed out here in Perth, the last thing he wants to do is prepare a slow, low one when the likes of Beefy have been going on about what a great pitch this was. He will get vilified.

Historically though, Melbourne is a very slow, low, dull pitch - it was in the three-day game - but who knows? I would very be very surprised if England got there to be greeted by an absolute shirt-front, a white pitch with no grass on it; but in the same way I would be very surprised if it flies through and is an absolute minefield.

I do think in preparing that pitch that suits their type of cricket, Australia have papered over the cracks a little bit because there are still some serious issues in their side, certainly in comparison to England.

They've got an opener with a dodgy technique in Phillip Hughes, the captain and vice-captain are short of runs - Ricky Ponting has that broken finger and to be honest Michael Clarke looks shot. Steve Smith is not a number six, and if Michael Beer is their spinner, I would take Swann every time.

They have got issues but they biggest one for them is still Johnson. If he runs in and bowls like that, all the cracks will be papered over again.

Comments (7)

  • Page 1 of 1
  • 1

Dave Brook says...

what are the requirements of an all rounder? Is prior an all rounder or that Aussie wicket keeper? Need to know. Is it a batter/bowler or batter/anywhere? Help me. Btw it may say Cheshire on my tag but I'm a Lancastrian lad with a Geordie mam. Answer this :) please

Posted 00:53 29th December 2010

Kevin Haynes says...

i agree with some of the things Nasser said ,but he keeps saying the Australians are not a better side than England is he trying to convince himself or England.i dont agree with your comment about the wicket, it was a great wicket for fast bowler who swing the ball and both teams had that.England batsmen let them down plain and simple.i must say England are ahead in the captain department ,i give Strauss 810 and pointing 310 Strauss got 8 because he should have bowl Swann a lot more,especially when Hussey first came in to bat.Merry Christmas and a happy new year to all of you.

Posted 13:19 25th December 2010

Anthony Easton says...

I think what we are seeing is two fairly even circket sides, and whoever best handles the conditions on any given day/pitch will win. I've heard some people suggest England dominated both early tests, but clearly the first test was an even result. Both teams lost 11 wickets for nearly 600 runs or more. Both sides have some batsmen in and out of form, England probably have more in form. Neither side has a truley great bowler, but each side has some good bowlers capable of great feats on their day. In the end thats the great thing about this series, neither side is a bad side or a great side. It means we go into every game unsure of the result. As a cricket lover its fantastic.

Posted 14:09 24th December 2010

Peter Hanna says...

G'day Nasser, You are a former England captain so I would dare not presume to know more than you,however Johnson's change in form I would suggest is more down to the work of Troy Cooley and others and not just a flash in the pan. Following on from that your prediction for England to continue winning has to many if's( in Australia we have a saying If my aunty had balls she'd be my uncle). The trouble with Swann he has come in with a big reputation and the majority of his wickets have been claimed on English pitches suited to him. The Aussie batsmen Hussey and Watson in particular don't hold any fear of him which is now starting to filter through the rest of the team. I think that we will now see if this English team can respond to pressure, the key is Peterson if he can play a good game like he talks a good game he should be the number one batsmen in the world!

Posted 21:37 22nd December 2010

George Staples says...

O.K. Nasser, most of what you say is correct, but to improve a losing side by changing the batting order and omitting those who are not performing, is not a sign of panic. Tell me, why is the Pieterson place so sacrosant? Why can,t he be left out? He is not performing, why cover for him ? Prior's glove work is shoddy and he's not scoring runs, leave him out and bring in a competent keeper. I fail to understand this England selection policy. Guaranteed places should not happen. The Aussies are not afraid to omit when necessary. Is isa to do with the central contract agreement.? Strauss and Flower need to shake up these players. Can they do it if they have guaranteed places to them ? I doubt it. George Staples

Posted 17:37 22nd December 2010

David Neale says...

Nass, agree with the bulk of your comments. I said 3-1 before a ball was bowled, simply because I have followed england from the age of 8 and 34 years on nothing has changed. Whenever we get a good side (and we are now) we have never managed to go through a series against a good side without blowing up. My issue with us is our batting style. With the generally weaker test attacks and flatter pitches, the current line up score well and at a rate of knots. Pietersan, Prior and Strauss can't block for long periods, they instinctively go after the ball. Only Trott and Cook can drop anchor. Brisbane apart they can't kill a game into a bore draw. Where India have the edge over England is that they adapt their game and battle to the death 2nd innings, just Compare Centurion with Perth. No need to panic is correct , Finn is as you say Broad at 20, but he's going at 6 an over excluding maidens. If we are honest half his wickets have come from long hops. Compare with Tremlett who was superb and reminded me of Glen Mcgrath. If he could motivate himself , Broad, Anderson, Tremlett and Swann is very exiting for the future. All I would do is rest Finn for Bresnan, and at Sydney Finn for Panesar. Collingwood will do his usual mandatory performance when threatended with the axe. We will win and are just a small step behind the Proteas and India.

Posted 21:44 21st December 2010

James Hunt says...

hi nass, quality insights - glad someone has pointed out test cricket is meant to be tough, and that runs aren't meant to be piled up like warnie with his text messaging. only thing i could add to your column is to say it would be quite nice to see you rocking up at number 3 or 4 for the rest of the series for us. i have a feeling we're going to have to fight - whatever the pitch. score ugly. bowl ugly, put the pressure on them.

Posted 20:46 20th December 2010

  • Page 1 of 1
  • 1

back to top

Other Cricket Experts:

Latest Posts in Cricket:

Latest News RSS feeds

Taylor fires England to win

James Taylor fired a vital fifty to guide England past India and into the Carlton Mid ODI Series final.

Final a fillip for England: Lloyd

England can take great heart from reaching Sunday's Tri-Series final with a tough win over India, says David Lloyd.

Graves gets ECB nomination

Yorkshire chairman Colin Graves has been nominated for the role of ECB chairman by the counties and Marylebone Cricket Club.

Gloucestershire appoint Dawson

Richard Dawson has left Yorkshire to become first XI coach at Gloucestershire.

Amir back from spot-fixing ban

Mohammad Amir, the convicted spot-fixer, has been cleared to play domestic cricket in Pakistan after an early end to his ban.


Lloyd on World Cup

Lloyd on World Cup

In the first of our new series, two-time winning captain Clive Lloyd tells us why he loves the Cricket World Cup.

World Cup Flashback

World Cup Flashback

Andy Bichel’s 7-20 and 34no destroyed England in 2003. Has there been a better all-round display?

World Cup Classics: West Indies implode against Australia in 1996

World Cup Classics: West Indies implode against Australia in 1996

Richie Richardson’s hopes of bowing out of one-day cricket as a World Cup-winning skipper were thwarted as the West Indies imploded against Australia to suffer their first ever semi-final defeat.