Archer’s reverse swing could draw hosts level
Conditions are likely to favour bowler’s weapon Umpires under scrutiny after series of mistakes
It is not an anticlimax. Only six weeks ago England were about to meet Australia in the World Cup semi-final, and yet many of the same actors are now serving up another feast – what looks as though it will be one of the most exquisitely close Ashes series.
At Edgbaston, Australia knocked out England. At Lord’s, England pinned Australia against the ropes. At Headingley – which deserves its first Ashes Test since 2009 after rebuilding the Rugby Stand – nobody, in truth, has any idea what is going to happen.
England, in theory, can still regain the Ashes if they only draw the third Test, but in practice they have to strike back now that the force is with them. Jofra Archer’s arrival, Steve Smith’s absence, David Warner’s waning and Australia’s startling reluctance to use Mitchell Starc, who could decide a match in one new-ball spell: in such a volatile series England have to strike when these four factors are working in their favour.
Only once before have England come from 1-0 down after two Tests to win an Ashes series. That was in 1956 and largely the work of Jim Laker. Archer’s intervention so far has been almost miraculous but he cannot be expected to take 19 wickets in one of the three remaining Tests, and 46 in the series, as Laker did in 1956.
Archer, however, has yet to unleash another of the arrows in his quiver: reverse swing. This week’s forecast is far better than last, and with sunshine around, a used pitch on the Headingley square for fielders to land the old ball on when returning to Jonny Bairstow, and the ground’s reputation as being second only to Old Trafford as a reverse-swinging venue – is there a northern capacity for abrasiveness? – Archer could further surprise. So far it has been a poor summer for mulberries, and reverse swing, owing to the dampness. It hardly featured in the World Cup as qualifying games were washed out, followed by more rain in the knockout stages. Pace bowlers relied on their newish knack of wobbling the ball by placing their first two fingers across the seam, not along it.
But Archer – while earning his keep in T20 franchises on dry pitches in hot places, which could include Hove – has mastered the craft of making a white ball reverse swing during its 20-over existence, and the yorker with it.
This series could be only the second in the Ashes to finish 2-2 – 1972 the other – but England could still win 3-1 as they have yet to explore all the options in Archer’s armoury: the toe-crusher as well as thighbruiser, rib-tickler – or breaker – and helmet-cracker. It could have been another of the all-time duels if Smith had not been concussed and ruled out of another round.
But this is the beauty of a fiveTest series, and what makes a twoTest series so unsatisfactory. In the course of five Tests the strength of cricket in each country is tested, whereas a two-test series is just a contest between the best 22, or 23, or 24 players. England, when forced to dig deep to replace James Anderson, struck gold in Archer; and Australia have not done badly in unearthing Marnus Labuschagne: one of the many well-prepared Trojan horses this summer, fresh out of Glamorgan’s stable, as ready to perform as Essex’s Peter Siddle or Nottinghamshire’s James Pattinson, who returns after resting in the second Test. There could be no closer like-for-like replacement than Labuschagne for Smith, except in the matter of technique.
They are both No 4 batsmen who field at second slip and bowl a bit of leg-spin, but the similarity goes further. Smith, who has an English mother, could have qualified for England, spent a summer playing for Kent seconds and was offered a three-year contract by Surrey, but went back to his native Sydney, and there proved himself more Australian than Australian by going the extra miles, not yards, in training.
Labuschagne emigrated as a child from South Africa to Brisbane. As he bounced back from the hit on his helmet by Archer – his second ball in Test cricket – and doggedly got into line thereafter, and soaked up more punishment, he radiated the same zeal to be more Aussie than Aussie.
What may not be world class in the third Test is the on-field umpiring. In the first Test at Edgbaston, Joel Wilson was very reliable: if he thought it was out, it wasn’t, and if he thought it wasn’t, it was. The second on-field umpire is Chris Gaffaney, so we have two of the least experienced members of the International Cricket Council’s elite panel, which is inappropriate for such a fixture.
In the second Test at Lord’s, Wilson did a much better job as the third umpire, by the sound of his decision-making on air – and it is a completely different job. On-field umpiring requires excellent manmanagement skills, and plenty of experience as a player or umpire, and preferably both. Not so TV umpires, who need plenty of experience of TV umpiring.
Neutral on-field umpires – those from third-party countries – are still essential in international cricket, because perceptions are so important.
But not TV umpires: they should be a separate body, and could come from any country, as their objectivity can be constantly monitored by all. May the best, or better, team win – not the team who are best at reviewing.