TLC 'End Of Summer Awards', Pt 2

Individual One-day Performance of the Summer - Eoin Morgan v South Africa, Champions Trophy

Too few performances to choose from, and most of the aptly named shortlist came from this match, but it was Morgan's knock which carried the most significance. His 67 came off 34 balls, including five 6s at a strike-rate of 197.05. Whilst not an altogether unheard of feat in world cricket, it was an innings rarely achieved by an Englishman - ok, Irishman - and came against the hosts and No 1 ranked team in the world. Along with Collingwood's performances in that tournament, and Wright's potential, it showed that maybe England do have the modern-day firepower to match the Albie Morkel's of this world.

Unsung hero of the Summer - Kevin Pietersen

I whole-heartedly supported Kevin Pietersen's actions at the start of the year. They cost him the job of England captain, and Peter Moores that of England coach, but in the long run, I felt that only good could come of it. I was wrong about the long run bit. The new coach and captain, plus Pietersen's attitude since the affair, enabled an outstanding turn-around and an Ashes result which would not have been previously possible.

An honourable mention to the selectors, who had an excellent Ashes series. They kept faith with Bopara and Broad, giving them every chance of a form recovery during the Ashes, and comprehensively won the 'battle of the gambles' - the inclusion of Trott vs the omission of Hauritz - at the Oval.

Best Opponent of the Summer - Ricky Ponting

Quite simply didn't deserve to become the first Australian captain to lose the Ashes twice in England since Billy Murdoch. Vilified by the English crowds for being too good, he finally garnered the reception he deserved at the Oval, during a match in which he demonstrated admirable humility. Not at his absolute best with the bat, his wicket is still the most prized of any Australian, while his captaincy is remarkably underrated in his homeland. Class act.

Best thing about the Summer - England's character

One thing this England side certainly have, is character. They bounced back from leadership implosion and Test series defeat in the Caribbean to win the Ashes, unthinkable embarrassment against Holland to beat Pakistan, disaster at Headingley to triumph at the Oval, and so on. Now Flower's job is to make such recovery unnecessary; but should we go 1-0 down in SA, all is far from lost.

Worst thing about the Summer - Devaluing of the England v Australia Contest

This occurred during the 6-1 post-Ashes ODI series defeat, and was nothing to do with the score, which merely devalued the ODI format. As the 50-over circus lumbered around the country, it threatened to take the shine off an otherwise memorable summer of anglo-antipodean battles.

Three Lions Cricket 'End Of Summer Awards', Pt 1

Time - during this well-earned international break - to review the summer of 2009. Only one team in the world could lose to Holland then triumph over Australia in the space of a few months.

Man of the Summer - 1. Andrew Strauss

A stunning summer, in fact, a stunning past 18 months. Grew into captaincy - improvement between Cardiff and Oval Tests was highly significant. Top scored in the Ashes (ave: 52.66) and ensuing ODI series (ave: 38.14). Married great batting and brilliant captaincy in an Ashes series; even Michael Vaughan didn't manage that.

2. Matt Prior

Finally, a worthy successor to Alec Stewart. Only just behind Strauss in terms of consistency during the Ashes. Has become a genuinely world-class keeper in remarkably short space of time. England conceded 106 fewer extras than Australia during the Ashes. Only criticisms being a moderate high score of 63 from seven Tests this summer (Ashes high score: 61) and an inability to consistently transfer Test batting cameos to one-day arena.

3. Andy Flower

Just brilliant. Comfortable in underdog role - a product of his playing career - but aiming to guide England to a level where they can dispense with the tag. Promising early signs of a special working relationship with Strauss. Showed his humility by opting out of the Oval victory lap.

Moment of the Summer - 1. Flintoff running out Ponting at the Oval.

A script writer would dare not pen it: Ponting run-out? Flintoff heroics? Been done before. But this was how it was meant to end. With his body restricting his bowling, Freddie, at wide mid-on, defied it one last time. The purest form of theatre, no-one could have predicted it. Except it didn't really surprise us. Flintoff's last offering of utter perfection to the Test match scene.

2. Panesar and Anderson Holding On At Cardiff

A monumental passage of cricket in the context of the rest of the summer. Few figures inspire less confidence with the bat than Monty Panesar, but his contribution that day - along with those of Anderson and Collingwood - were the first glimpses of the steely character which was to prove the difference between the sides.

3. Swann's Ashes Winning Wicket

Always a sweet occurrence, but made even more sickly by the the fact England were denied an on-field winning moment in 2005. I'm sure Swann doesn't mention it. Much.

Team Performance of the Summer - 1. The Oval Test (Ashes)

Edges out the Lord's Test purely because it followed the Headingley debacle, which, though both were bad, was far worse than the performance at Cardiff. An outstanding team effort, with argument-ending contributions from Stuart Broad and Jonathan Trott.

2. v Pakistan, World T20

A win, under huge pressure, against the eventual winners. Highly commendable due to the unthinkable embarrassment defeat would have caused. Going out of your own tournament after three days, before some teams have even played a game, would have rivaled World Cup '99 - when we exited the tournament before the official team song was released.

3. v South Africa, Champions Trophy

So they can do it. And how. The hosts barely knew what had hit them as England compiled a Shah-and-Morgan-inspired 323. Strauss said it was the best he'd seen England bat in a 50-over game, and, backed-up by sound bowling, it can act as a model performance to aspire to.

Individual Test Performance of the Summer - 1. Strauss at Lord's (Ashes)

The innings which announced England's arrival in the series as a team with pretensions of winning it. Batted for a whole day, and put on 196 with Cook for the first wicket. Fell early on day two, for 161, but had made the decisive contribution of the match by then, despite Flintoff taking the man-of-the-match honours on day five.

2. Broad at the Oval

Kudos to the selectors for sticking with him, kudos to the man himself for the decisive spell of the series. Stuart Broad won the Ashes for England in 12 overs, on day two of the last Test, during a spell of 5-37 - which included four wickets in 21 balls. Stunning stuff, and a 2005-shaped dose of excitement.

3. Trott at the Oval

A scarcely believable debut. So many parallels with KP's 158 four years ago. Siddle looked for all the world to have him caught behind off the first ball of day three, just like McGrath seemed to have snaffled Pietersen first ball in '05, but two great umpiring decisions enabled two historic innings - Trott's every bit as good as his countryman's. Actually, better. As Scyld Berry put it, "one of the all-time best England debuts."

England Issued Stuart Broad Warneing

Watching him bowl was an unforgettable experience, listening to him commentate is refreshing, and reading his articles is always worthwhile - even if it's sometimes advisable to have a bowl of salt to hand, with fingers in pinching position.

Shane Warne, in his Times column today, has warned England that they are in danger of 'ruining' one of their most promising young stars, Stuart Broad, providing he bats - as looks likely - at No 7 in South Africa.

He said: "If England want to ruin Stuart Broad, it strikes me that they may be going the right way about it. [Batting at No 7] could be the worst thing to happen to the guy.

I'm not bagging Broad, because he has the makings of being a good player. He is a decent bowler and a reasonable batsman - just not an international all-rounder. By thinking that he is, England risk taking his focus away from what he is learning to do well: first and foremost to support frontline bowlers, then to chip in with runs."

I'd apply the pinch of salt to the "makings of a good player" part. Broad has proved a match winner on several occasions in his short career so far, making important contributions with bat and ball. He's one of England's good players, the question is, how much better can he get?

If Warne drew on his own experience in writing this article, then it's barely applicable. He played in Test teams who almost always named their wicket-keeper at No 7. The second half of his Test career coincided with the emergence of a certain Adam Gilchrist, who single-handedly changed the job spec of the wicket-keeper forever, in making 12 hundreds from No 7 and even one from No 8.

Gilchrist's predecessor in the Australia team, and their keeper/No 7 for the first half of Warne's 145 appearances in the baggy green, was Ian Healy. Though made to look decidedly human when compared to Gilchrist, his batting average, after the last of his 119 Tests, was a respectable 27.39. After 22 matches, Stuart Broad's stands at 30.68.

It would be easy for England to 'ruin' Stuart Broad, but I think that a step up the batting order is some way down the list of possible ways how. Too much cricket - let's hope he's rested for the Bangladesh tour - and expecting Oval-like performances every match are more dangerous threats to England's brightest young talent.

Having him at seven is not ideal, but nor is not having a genuine Test-class all-rounder, and at present England don't.

One of Warne's arguments is that Broad at No 7 heaps too much pressure on him. On his batting maybe, but in allowing another bowler in the team it should have the opposite effect on his primary weapon. A 7, 8, 9 of Prior, Broad and Swann sounds perfect, but that would leave Broad as one of four front-line bowlers; a prospect South Africa's supreme batting line-up would surely relish.

The balance of the side is a key issue going into the South Africa series, and if Broad at No 7 works, England will have unlocked the answer. If it doesn't, he's shown enough character so far in his England career to suggest that one failed experiment wont 'ruin' him for good.

CT Match 3 (v NZ): Thoughts Turn To Semi-Final

29/09/09 - New Zealand won by four wickets. Both sides progress to semis.

England have spent most of September disproving the theory that winning the toss gives a team an advantage in a one-day cricket match. Yesterday they discovered to their cost that in some cases it does make a big difference.

However, it's still no excuse for being bowled out for 146 - 66 runs less than Sri Lanka managed against England on Friday.

An attacking approach and clear minds had characterised England's first two games of the tournament, but here, as on English soil, those minds were caught in two - a product of good bowling and demons in the pitch. When it looked like the good work of the opening games may be undone by a thrashing at the hands and bats of their weakest group opposition, England's bowlers added some respectability to the scoreboard.

And morale-wise that could prove important, not least because it was masterminded by the quiet-up-until-now Stuart Broad (4-39). Sidebottom (1-32) replaced Onions, but failed to do enough to add any permanence to the switch. He may be more economical than Onions, but the Durham man will target the stumps more if picked against Australia, and thus carries more threat.

And Australia it is, after they crawled over the line against Pakistan.

England must forget the NatWest series, and recall the spirit of the Sri Lanka and South Africa games. The batsmen will take solace from the venue - Centurian - and the bowlers from the brittle middle order of the Michael Clarke-less opposition, kindly exposed today by Pakistan.

Fourth ODI (v Aus) Reaction: Selectors' Hands Tied

Australia won by 7 wickets (with 38 balls remaining). Australia win the series.

England freshened up today's line-up a bit, but not enough, as Australia claimed an unassailable 4-0 lead.

In came Denly, Broad and Rashid for Swann and the rested duo of Paul Collingwood and James Anderson. Except that in the Sky commentary box neither Michael Holding nor Sir Ian Botham could believe they were being rested. Both were at pains to point out that Collingwood has 'only' played 77 days cricket so far this year. Surely they're missing the point; since the new year he's been away in the Caribbean playing Test and ODI series before embarking on a summer of seven home Tests, more ODIs and a stint captaining his country at the World T20. Atherton stood tall for the batting fraternity, suggesting all that may have taken a mental toll, but Holding was having none of it. 77 days of England duty on the pitch it may have been, but it's been at least that or more off it. I don't begrudge Collingwood a rest ahead of the Champions Trophy, in fact, I called for it after the third ODI.

Strauss winning the toss has become as inevitable as England's batting collapsing. He chose to bat first, giving Denly a chance to impress, which he did in part. 11 off 17 balls in 20 minutes is hardly the stuff of dreams, but he did offer a glimpse of hope. First ball nerves were dispelled with a leg-side clip for four, and he's got the first one out of the way. If he can find his feet over the next three matches, England will at least head to the Champions Trophy with a settled opening pair.

Again only Strauss (63) and Shah (39) offered any resistance as England squandered their best start of the series. After 16 overs they were 89-1, which though not headline-worthy does represent an improvement.

Matt Prior's struggles with the bat reflect those of his team. At present he's not translating his Test fluency and expansive shot play to the shorter game. Today he batted at four, meaning he's now batted everywhere from one to nine in ODIs (except five), though as Scyld Berry Points out in The Telegraph, come February, England are likely to install Craig Kieswetter. How we could do with his hitting now.

Brett Lee produced the outstanding performance of the series in claiming five wickets for 49, four of them clean bowled. Sometimes you have to just admire an opponents performance, and having watched the Ashes from the sidelines, Lee is unleashing his frustration in style. That is forgivable, the treatment - or rather non-treatment - of Hauritz less so.

He's clearly a tidy bowler - better than his career stats suggest - but he must be loving how cagily England are dealing with him. They didn't even try going after him - as his economy rate of 2.30 suggests - and with Lee on fire at the other end, this proved fatal. When the opposition are turning their potential weaknesses into strengths, it's time for changes.

Or at least it would be if the Champions Trophy squad hadn't already been announced. Bringing in fresh faces now would be counter productive - England must find their solution with this crop of players. Were this not the case, the likes of Mascarenhas, Lumb, Bell and Trott would all be in with a shout. The CT squad was named before Trott's Ashes heroics, but his unflappable temperament and a one-day average in the fourties suggests he'll feature in the winter tour to South Africa.

On to Trent Bridge, where Stuart Broad destroyed the South Africans last year.

Central Contracts: Harmison And Panesar Dropped

Despite Andy Flower reiterating that "central contracts don't decide selection - performances do," there are signs in yesterday's central contracts announcement of the direction in which England will head over the coming year. Onions, Swann and Prior - three of England's leading lights in the last twelve months - have been awarded full contracts for the first time. Panesar and Harmison - along with Patel, Ambrose and the retired Michael Vaughan - have lost theirs.

Ian Bell also received one of the eleven full-time deals - an indication he'll be on the teamsheet for the first Test in South Africa, though hopefully at four, with KP moving up to three.

With their contracts taken away, the onus is firmly on Panesar and Harmison, and neither can have many complaints. The former has slipped behind Adil Rashid in the pecking order, who, with his all-round skills will be hard to overtake. Harmison does not have the threat of a like-for-like replacement breathing down his neck. The news will test his hunger, his options being retire now or add another chapter to his jekyll and hyde England career.

Full Contracts

Anderson, Bell, Broad, Collingwood, Cook, Onions, Pietersen, Prior, Sidebottom, Strauss, Swann

Incremental Contracts

Bopara, Bresnan, Flintoff, Rashid, Shah, Trott, Wright

England's Misfiring Top Order

Ahead of the second ODI against Australia at Lord's tomorrow, Strauss has called upon the top order to contribute more runs, and in doing so has highlighted his teams' main problem across all forms of the game.

He said, "If you want to win consistently one of your top four or five needs to get hundreds more often than not. That is an area we are looking to an address."

They're focussing their attention on the right area.

The bowling unit is in good shape, and has depth - it restricted Australia to 260 yesterday, and enabled England to win the Ashes, despite their inferior batting. Indeed, the likes of Swann, Broad, Anderson and yesterday Rashid, have contributed with the bat too and in doing so, disguised, to some extent, the frailty of the specialist batting line-up.

Take the Ashes series. Of the seven innings in which every member of the team batted, the players selected for their batting alone (numbers one to five in the batting order) - were outscored by the all-rounders and bowlers (numbers six to eleven, plus extras) on five occasions, coming out on top just twice. Take extras out of the equation and the non-specialist batsmen still come out on top, four-three.

The Ashes averages back-up this evidence. Removing KP and Trott, who played two and one Tests respectively, leaves Andrew Strauss as the only specialist batsman - though you could argue that as captain, he's an all-rounder - in the top four; where he's joined by Swann, Flintoff and Prior - all primarily in the side to fulfill a different role.

The problem resurfaced yesterday in the 50 over game. Ideally, one of a team's specialist batsman would make a century once in every three/four - five at the most - ODIs. A side would expect at least three half-centuries in the absence of a three figure score. No Englishman passed 50 yesterday, which is no basis on which to expect to win a match.

It's not all bad news for England though. Their tail are wagging like never before, and gone are the days when they stutter from being six wickets down to all out in under five overs. James Anderson is as decent a Test number 11 as England have ever had.

Also, when their top batsmen do perform, they win. The two occasions when the specialist batsmen did outdo their all-rounder/bowling team-mates in the Ashes, were at Lord's and The Oval. So either England should play all their matches in London, or concentrate on sorting out their top order - something which Jonathan Trott's immediate success has ensured will happen anyway. Factor in too that England were without their best batsman for 60 per cent of the series, and Strauss may soon be blessed with the improvement he seeks.

This Time Last Year...

England were completing a 4-0 ODI series win against South Africa - now arguably the best side in the world - with only rain in Cardiff preventing a 5-0 whitewash and a leap up to second in the world rankings. Peter Moores's England were remarkably dominant in this series, and, had a World Cup been scheduled for September, would have fancied their chances. Pietersen, the newly appointed captain, and Flintoff were rampant, but England carried no passengers; every single member of the team made telling contributions.

As an opening partnership, Bell and Prior failed only once and England seemed to have solved a lingering problem. The depth of the whole batting line-up was such that from the second match onwards Luke Wright batted at eight, with Stuart Broad at nine. Crucially, such firepower did not come at the expense of the bowling armoury, which consisted of Anderson, Flintoff, Broad, Patel and Harmison with Collingwood and KP if needed. Only the four frontline quicks were called upon at Trent Bridge, where Broad produced one of those spells (5-23) and the tourists, victors in the Test series a few weeks earlier, were dismissed for 83.

But England failed to cash in on this undoubted momentum, and ended up on the wrong end of a 5-0 whitewash a few months later in India. One-day cricket inconsistency had reared its ugly head once more.

Rain 'Saves' England

Rain caused the first T20I against Australia to be abandoned yesterday, just seven balls into the England run chase. Having restricted the Aussies to 145 - one over the par score at Old Trafford this season - England were 4-2 when the heavens opened - prompting "Lucky England Saved By Rain" headlines today.

Losing Bopara and Denly so early did represent a poor start, but such a thing is fairly common in T20, and, given the depth of the batting, a full recovery would have been a distinct possibility. Hopefully they will get another chance tomorrow.

The bowling was decent, with only Cameron White looking settled at the crease. The death-bowling duo of Broad and Sidebottom kept their cool admirably. But the fielding could have been better, with Wright and Denly uncharacteristically shelling catches.

It has emerged that Paul Collingwood doesn't know whether he will continue as T20 captain beyond tomorrow's game, but would welcome the chance to lead the side at the next World T20. A decision must be made as soon as possible.

Vaughan's England Blueprint

Under the sub-headline, "Mission: win the Ashes in Australia", Michael Vaughan offers his England blueprint for success in an interview with Scyld Berry in today's Sunday Telegraph.

He has interesting views regarding the make-up of the team, championing a three, four, five of KP - "because your best player should bat there" - Bell and Trott. He wants England to stick with Alastair Cook, introduce Rashid at number eight and take Bopara to South Africa. When pressed on bowling names he lists Broad, Anderson, Onions, Harmison and Plunkett as potential dangermen for the winter tour, and Chris Woakes and Steve Finn as ones for the future.

Sound as these comments are, Flower, Strauss and the selectors have given us plenty of reason to trust their current thinking regarding selection policy. One day, Vaughan may well find himself part of that process, but for now, this interview represents no more than the informed view of an interested bystander. Where one wishes Vaughan had a more hands-on role, is with regard to his comments relating to the structure of the English game.

Michael Vaughan is a universally liked and respected figure. He was an England weapon as a batsman and captain, and, despite recent retirement, could still be now - if only the ECB could find some sort of consultancy role for him. Even reading his newspaper column would be a start.

Vaughan is acutely aware of the fixture congestion faced by international cricketers today, and laments the lack of resting opportunities: "The players are going to get niggles in the next few weeks [during the upcoming T20I and ODI series' against Australia] and we wont go to the Champions Trophy with our best team in the best shape. It will be another tournament where we don't give ourselves the best chance of winning."

Vaughan understands the needs and necessities of both the county and international games. He excercised logic and diplomacy on the pitch, and could bring the same to an administrative role. He knows only too well that Ashes success can be wasted as a platform on which to build, and is perfectly placed to help avoid mistakes being made this time around.

Berry goes on to quote the Schofield Report, commissioned two years ago by the ECB. In the light of the recent decision to ditch 50-over domestic cricket, it makes damning reading: "The First Class Counties' One Day programme should mirror, wherever possible, the current ICC competition rules, regulations and formats. A reduction in the amount of cricket played at domestic First Class level county championship games played is essential in order to alleviate fixture congestion and allow for better preparation of the players. The domestic programme must aspire to quality and not simply to quantity and the 40-over discipline may be deemed surplus to proper requirement."

Vaughan's reaction? "It's just greed."

Did England Deserve To Win The Ashes?

In short, yes, though some, including Australian cricket writer, Robert Craddock, suggest not - basing their argument around the issues of stats and luck. But they're missing the point. Stats can be misleading, and luck plays an essential part in any series win.

As Ponting alluded to in his post-match interview at the Oval, many of the Ashes 2009 stats weigh heavily in Australia's favour. But the vast majority of these figures are batting related; top seven run scorers (6-1 Australia), centuries (8-2 Aus), scores above 400 (3-2 Aus), partnerships of 100 or more (8-5 Aus) and so on. Despite some of those stats being misleading - for instance, four of Australia's centuries were in their first innings at Cardiff, which means three of them were 'Ian Bell centuries': made in the wake of a teammate achieving the feat - they merely confirm what the team-sheets suggest: that Australia possess superior batsman.

It's been said of Bopara that he must learn it's not how but how many that's most important when making runs in Test cricket. It's also when, and England's two hundreds were crucially and beautifully timed.

However, it's bowling that wins matches, and here England's stats do measure up. England had four five-wicket hauls to Australia's two. England took 20 wickets twice as many times as Australia and in two matches England coupled devastating, match-winning spells with an ability to finish off the tail. The wickets were shared amongst the attack, and Flintoff, Anderson, Onions, Broad and Swann all had their moments of glory - with bat and ball.

Luck, in varying degrees, is a factor in any situation which requires a team to string a set of results together - such as a tournament or Test series. This can range from large slices of luck, like the Danish football team winning the 1992 European Championships despite originally not even qualifying, to moments of mere good fortune, like Dhoni winning five coin tosses in a row on his way to captaining India to the World T20 crown in 2007. It can even simply mean the avoidance of any bad luck, like England being able to field an unchanged team for the first four Tests of the 2005 Ashes.

England had a bit of luck in this series, but it was a brand of luck which shared more of an affinity with Dhoni than some now-retired Danish footballers. Umpiring blunders - which usually even themselves out over the course of a series - still favoured England slightly by the end, and Strauss managed to win four out of five coin tosses. However, they would happily have given these snipets of fortune for the full fitness of their best batsman and talismanic bowler.

On rare occasions, luck can be a decisive factor in a one-off encounter, but not in a five match series, and certainly not in this one. England were dealt a few breaks, and used them spectacularly to their own advantage. When it really mattered, they triumphed in a one-off game which Australia only needed to draw, by a margin of 197 runs.

Ultimately, stats, and, to an extent, luck, are measurable variables. Fortunately, in sport, such factors can be trumped by courage, character and resolve - qualities which present themselves in the form of the only two numbers which matter: 2-1.

Ashes Victory: Web Reaction

Excitement and reaction to England's win is rife across web, nowhere more so than on the BBC website. One of their most emotive features is the audio commentary of all ten final day Australian wickets. The crowd match and surpass football ground decibels as Aggers and CMJ reach dangerous levels of excitement.

There's also immediate reaction from man of the match Stuart Broad, and morning-after thoughts from retiring hero Freddie Flintoff. Elsewhere, there's an analysis of the series, a media round-up, an account of that historic final day, player ratings for the series and Justin Langer calling for Strauss to be knighted.

Cricinfo provide a typically high class report of the day. Andrew Miller examines captain Strauss's monumental impact on the series and Andy Zaltzman points out, in a way that only he can, that England won despite averaging 6.49 runs per wicket less than Australia - the biggest deficit ever overcome to win a Test series.

Patrick Kidd offers his stat-fuelled take on how England regained the urn on his excellent Line and Length blog, but Charlie Randall gives his rather more sobering reaction to England's success - in which he claims that the "selectors had a poor series". Over on Cricket-blog, JC has recorded some typically humorous and Australian observations, while further Aussie reaction is provided by The Wisden Cricketer with a round-up from the Australian press.

Denly Named In Champions Trophy Squad

Joe Denly is the only new face in England's 15 man Champions Trophy squad, and a welcome inclusion. Andrew Strauss will lead the team, who will take on the Australians in seven ODIs before heading to the tournament in South Africa next month. KP misses out through injury, and Mascarenhas has been dropped.

Collingwood keeps the captaincy - in the absence of Strauss - for the forthcoming T20 internationals against Australia, and Denly and Test new-boy Trott have been included.

Only one new face puts paid to the significant changes I was hoping for, and I'd love to have seen Michael Lumb make the cut, but Bresnan, Rashid and Morgan are largely untried at this level, so hopefully they'll get a chance to impress. Overall, there is potential for fielding a relatively new-look team, which, given the lack of consistency of the current side and the relatively unimportant nature of the Champions trophy, is what I hope the management go with.

ODI series v Australia and Champions Trophy

Strauss (capt)

Anderson

Bopara

Bresnan

Broad

Collingwood

Denly

Flintoff

Morgan

Prior

Rashid

Shah

Sidebottom

Swann

Wright

T20 Squad v Australia

Same, minus Strauss and plus Trott.

The Langer Dossier

Here it is in full, and here's some reaction to selected highlights:

On England: "English players rarely believe in themselves. Many of them will stare a lot but this is very shallow... They will retreat very quickly."

Traditionally it is hard to argue with this assessment, but it must be remembered that, 2005 aside, Langer played in a number of extremely one-sided Ashes series, including some of England's darkest days in the 90s. Also, he will have encountered much mediocrity since his association with county cricket began in the early 90s. I would also argue that things began to change on this front in around 2004, when the performances of Flintoff, Harmison and KP adopted something of a swagger and Fletcher's England began to gell in a serious way. With the nucleus of that team now disbanded, they could currently be building their second significant team of the decade. The reason for my optimism? The character of the newcomers - Broad, Swann and Bopara. Quality-wise, it remains to be seen how far they can go, but in terms of temperament I believe they compare favourably with their predecessors, and could end up banishing Langer's assertion once and for all.

On James Anderson: "He is swing [sic] the ball well but again can be a bit of a pussy if he is worn down."

I think he's describing Jimmy Anderson mark 1 here. His second coming, since coaches have stopped mucking around with his action, has seen him turn from a promising but confused youngster into one of the world's best swing bowlers, and one worthy of leading the attack. The maturity of his performances in the Caribbean confirmed his new status, even if the stats don't always. There's still room for him to improve on flat pitches, but his rate of improvement suggests he will.

On Ravi Bopara: "He is a bit of a street fighter who is sure to wind the boys up by his strutting around... I would leave him alone and just bowl at him rather than letting our egos take away our focus."

Langer is actually complementary about Ravi in the email, calling him a "good player". Obviously the Australians have got to him with the ball this series, but I actually think Langer's comments are positive - he clearly sees something in Bopara if he's worried the Aussies could lose focus by concentrating too much on trying to out-psyche him.

On Matt Prior: "I would chip away at him about his wicketkeeping... I am not sure he actually likes keeping that much and from all accounts he has a massive ego."

Well, whether they have done that or not is irrelevant - for me Prior has been the individual success story of the series for England. Langer's referring to how close Prior came to giving up the gloves and concentrating on an international future with the bat alone, and he's right in that there was a massive question-mark concerning his keeping even directly prior to the Cardiff Test. But, he's been brilliant with the gloves and as good as ever with the bat.

Also, on the ego issue, surely that's no bad thing? It's something he levels at Swann, Prior and Ravi (presumably it's too obvious with KP) but seems to contradict his ideas about English players' lack of belief. I'd take big egos any day - a swagger and a few choice words are exactly what we need to compete with the likes of Australia, and if that turns out being one of Pietersen's many legacies, then that's no bad thing.

The Philosophical Approach

That's what I'm adopting after another horror show for England.

Bad days and bad Test matches are nothing new, but a match containing so few crumbs of comfort is rare, even for England. In fact, Stuart Broad's figures of 6-91 are the sole positive aspect of the past two days play. But, Test cricket is prone to over-reaction, and just like many of us got carried away after Lord's - reading too much in to one fine win - it would be easy to do so here. After all, six days ago we woke up with a genuine belief that one more good day from England would see the Ashes home at Edgbaston.

Most people are forgetting two important things:

• There is a decent sized break between Headingley and the Oval - even bigger given the quick nature of our capitulation here. Test cricket is a wrestle for momentum, and the longer England have to regroup, the more chance they have of negating Australia's current advantage.
• If England win the next Test, they win the Ashes. Australia have been brilliant here, but in Tests two and three they showed themselves capable of ordinary cricket. England wont bat and bowl that badly again.

England chose the most unforgiving of Test grounds on which to bat and bowl abysmally during the same match. Add an excellent Australian display to the mix, and you have a recipe for the sort of disaster we have witnessed here.

But I grew up during the 90s, so to watch a young and largely inexperienced England team approach the final Ashes Test knowing a win will be enough, is the sort of scenario I used to dream of. The 2005 series skewed our outlook and expectations a bit - it was the pinnacle of Vaughan and Fletcher's England, but this is Strauss and Flower's. Sure the Aussies are rebuilding, but so are we. Winning the next Test would be a great start.

Headingley Day One: Analysis

So, what prompted the eleven mug-shot-style photos of anguished England batsmen on the front of the Telegraph today? Are Australia that much better than us, or was it just one of those days (x 100)?

Well, yesterday they were that much better than us, and it certainly had the feel of one of those days. I had no problem with us choosing to bat - Ponting would have done the same - but the locals feared the worst at that point. There were plenty of "typical Headingley morning" comments flying around, and it was clear early on that batting would be tough. Shouldn't have been that hard though. Australia bowled exceptionally well, but it was never a first innings 102 pitch.

• England's batsmen are still slipping in and out of 'Test mode'. Marcus North was still on three after more than an hour at the crease. Not thrilling, but there's a lesson there for Ravi and co. Bopara in particular got out to another ball he simply didn't need to play at. England's batsmen need to start valuing their wicket above all else.
• The bowlers failed to learn from both the tourists' performance and their superior Headingley experience and came out looking for glory balls straight away. That's not how Clark and Siddle got their success. Far too much short stuff, and no where near enough full and straight. Broad was much improved, and, in their defence, Anderson had a niggle and they can't have been expecting to turn their arms over at 2:30 on the first afternoon.

Of the two disciplines, the batting was the most disappointing - leaving the bowlers with a thankless task. It struck me that in 2005, the Tests were more spaced out - allowing the players the chance to return to their counties for the odd day of out-of-the-spotlight batting. Tresco, Flintoff, Bell and KP all returned to the less pressurised confines of county cricket which provided them with a change of scenery and time in the middle. Poor old Ravi has been stuck in a rut of low scores this series (35, 1, 18, 27, 23 and 1) and would have really benefitted from a brief return to Essex and a confidence boosting innings. Unfortunately, due to two Test series and a World Cup he has not been afforded the luxury enjoyed by Vaughan's top order four years ago.

The way things are going, an optimist would recall this Test from 1981. A realist wouldn't bother.

Decisions, decisions...

Given the way Flintoff's fitness waned badly at Edgbaston, and having just seen Sky images of him bowling today in the Headingley nets, I don't rate his chances of being fit for tomorrow. This is a huge game and will quite possibly decide the series - full five-day fitness is clearly key. Even Flintoff is not worth a risk, and the selectors must remember that despite his Edgbaston batting heroics, he's mainly there for his bowling. I don't think he'll be as big a miss as KP, though it does pose problems in terms of balance.

There was a time - not long ago - when an often injured Flintoff's absence actually improved the balance of the England team. Right now, given his recntly improved batting, Broad's emergence and Prior's form at six, that is not the case. There are a number of possible combinations involving the three squad extras; Harmison, Sidebottom and Trott.

I would keep the changes to a minimum and swap him for one of the bowlers. Sure, that weakens the batting, but our lower order is not that of years gone by, and Swann, Broad and co can cope with a one place promotion. I'd pick Sidebottom given that he's a fine exponent of our greatest weapon against these Aussies. That deprives England of a hit-the-deck bowler, but as long as the Headingley pitch lives up to its swing-receptive reputation, I don't see that as a problem. Except that according to Matthew Hoggard, that's a big if. Still, Sidebottom has the local knowledge and has never let England down. The same cannot be said of Harmison.

Broad must keep his place, and not just because he strengthens a weakened batting line-up. He's a quality bowler and better than he's shown at times this series. He's learning all the time and is commendably unafraid to take the fight to the Aussies. He could do with a bit more guidance as to what his specific role is within this bowling attack.

I would also continue with Bopara and Bell, although two failures here by Ravi should open the door for Trott at the Oval. There, big scores and batting time on a good pitch are likely to be the order of the day - especially if the score is still 1-0 - and if Bopara still hasn't played an innings of substance since early summer by then, then Trott should come in, because he undoubtedly has.

England will decide on Flintoff in the morning.

Steve James Column In The Sunday Telegraph

As ever, Steve James makes a number of excellent and original points in his weekly Sunday Telegraph column. He calls for the selectors to resist the temptation to lower Bopara in the order by placing Bell at three. He rightly points to Bell's poor record in that position, and insists that Bopara is backed (after all, he does already have three centuries in that position - that's three more than Bell.) In addition, he would promote Collingwood to four and have Bell at five. This is unlikely to happen, but is backed up by his stats.

Bell's record by position:

Number 3 - ave: 31.00, 0 hundreds

Number 4 - ave: 47.16, 2 hundreds

Number 5 - ave: 54.41, 2 hundreds

Number 6 - ave: 49.00, 4 hundreds

Ian Chappell argues the exact opposite in his column in the same paper - preferring Bell at three and Bopara at five. I'm with James, but it will be fascinating to see what happens.

As for the bowling, James would think about replacing Broad, and is unsure about Onions. Harmison's form is excellent, and I can see him playing a part in this series, but at Edgbaston, I would back the current bowling attack. Broad was better at Lord's and is highly capable, while Onions did fine in his first Ashes Test - no better, but certainly no worse. Both, in my opinion, deserve at least one more chance.

A final excellent and overlooked point he makes, is to remind us who the England vice-captain is. It's Alastair Cook by the way, but I did need reminding. As James points out, "It is far from obvious on the field. More advice seems to come from Paul Collingwood."

Preliminary ICC Champions Trophy Squad Announced

England announced a 30-strong squad for the 2009 ICC Champions Trophy, yesterday. The tournament will be staged in South Africa in September and the squad will be halved by August 23.

England's ODI form in recent years has been extremely frustrating - not least because it has at times - 2007 home series v India, 2008 home series v South Africa - been excellent. However, for each of these results there is also the whitewashes of the 2008 winter series v India or the 2006 summer series v Sri Lanka.

So, results suggest that England are not a million miles away from finding a successful ODI formula, but the current one is not good enough; one or two steps forward, followed by the same number back. They have to try something a bit new. Although the selectors have named only one uncapped player (Hampshire's Michael Lumb), the squad includes a number of fresh, young and inexperienced names. Their inclusion could provide the subtle change in direction which leads to that illusive consistency.

This is the perfect tournament in which players can shed the label of potential in favour of the far more useful tags, experienced and good enough. It's not a World Cup, and I would suggest that signs of significant improvement (an obvious and suitable gameplan, clearly defined roles within the team, picking the right players and evidence of tournament-savvy play) is more important than returning with the trophy. The logic behind that being that should England happen upon some consistency, they may one day return home with a coveted World Cup.

That means making tough calls - dispensing with good servants of the county game who have served England passably in the past - Rob Key and Gareth Batty - and even those who have an obvious Test future but have failed to grasp countless ODI opportunities - Ian Bell and, in my opinion, Andrew Strauss.

Here's my squad. The main difference between this XV and the one which will be chosen is the absence here of the captain, Strauss. For me, his inclusion is indicative of the two steps forward, two steps back policy - he's shown at times (as recently as the Caribbean tour) that he's capable in the format, but struggled badly with its concept at other times, thus, as an opener, hampering the whole team. I would certainly keep him in the selection mix, but for this tournament would give the captaincy to Stuart Broad - eighth in all-time England ODI wicket-takers list and highly-rated as a thinking cricketer by Michael Vaughan.

My XV:

James Anderson (Lancashire)

Ravi Bopara (Essex)
Stuart Broad (Nottinghamshire)
Paul Collingwood (Durham)
Joe Denly (Kent)
Andrew Flintoff (Lancashire)
Michael Lumb (Hampshire)
Dimitri Mascarenhas (Hampshire)
Eoin Morgan (Middlesex)
Graham Onions (Durham)
Kevin Pietersen (Hampshire)
Matt Prior (Sussex)
Adil Rashid (Yorkshire)
Graeme Swann (Nottinghamshire)

Luke Wright (Sussex)

First Test, Day Three. Australia Well In Control.

Australia end the day on 179-5, 44 runs ahead of England.

Dispiriting day, and one which, barring a miraculous start to day four, has left England battling to draw this first Test. So far, the pitch has flattened out as the match progresses, and ultimately it is the timid and edgy first innings batting effort that has put England in this position. Fortunately, the batsmen have a chance to atone, and prove they are better than day one - which they are, (each of the top four were out in disappointing fashion.) A team innings in which no one scores over 70 will not be acceptable again in this series. Ponting and Katich stood up for Australia, and, whether it happens tomorrow or on Sunday, a couple of England batsmen will need to do the same.

Broad took the wicket of Clarke just before the end of the evening session. That should do him the world of good. Throughout his short international career he has made it a fool's game to write him off - using a number of knock-backs as a launch-pad for triumph. I'm sure a difficult start to his Ashes career will prove no different.