Alastair Cook showed his age. Faced with the challenge of preventing total humiliation before being handed the urn at the conclusion of this match, he batted like English batsmen used to bat in Test match cricket. As a consequence the game is still going on. England still trail by 129 runs and there are whispers of some nasty weather from Sunday afternoon onwards. But Cook’s dismissal by Australia’s occasional leg-spinner, Steve Smith, just before the close for a most dutiful 85 in five and a half hours, means that his side will be hard-pressed to last that long.
England were the small matter of 332 in arrears when they followed on after a little flurry of strokes from Moeen Ali and Mark Wood in the first half-hour. So there was considerable justification for Cook’s throwback innings. In fact this was such an unusual approach in this frenetic summer that his effort was both admirably methodical and oddly mesmerising. Every ball was played on its merit; the wide ones were usually ignored; the clip and the cut brought him his runs. If he was runless for a while he was not bothered, a rare occurrence among modern batsmen.
But Cook’s was a lone effort, a defiant demonstration to callow colleagues of how to stay in, by trusting one’s technique, biding one’s time and obstinately grinding away.
The others came, stayed dutifully for a while as if visiting an ancient relative and departed in an assortment of ways.
Adam Lyth, in what we can confidently predict was his last Test innings for a while, prodded against Peter Siddle (another weird throwback since he persisted in bowling a line and length to the exclusion of anything else) and was caught at second slip.
In one sense Lyth has been unlucky. His promotion to the Test arena might have happened when England were confronted with lesser new-ball bowlers. But he can tell his grandchildren that he played an entire Ashes series won by England and his output was greater than that of Pelham Warner, who opened throughout all five matches against South Africa in 1905-06 without scoring as many runs as Lyth; but sadly nobody else since Warner has scored so few in a five-match series.
Ian Bell, as often seems to be the case, attracted a very good ball and so left the arena shaking his head again. Hence he should not be subjecting himself to too much self-reproach about his dismissals in this match even if he looked very scratchy before falling victim to a delivery from the fast-improving (as a bowler, that is) Mitchell Marsh, which lifted surprisingly.
Joe Root’s dismissal was exasperating, caught by one of two men loitering on the leg-side boundary – just as he was when trying to save the game facing Ishant Sharma at Lord’s last year. Root has set up two England victories this summer but it is not compulsory to hook every bouncer.
Jonny Bairstow just survived a spell from Mitchell Johnson, taking three fours down to third man in the process. But then he fell to a catch at short leg off Nathan Lyon. In hindsight he should have reviewed the dismissal because the replay showed that the ball had touched the visor on the helmet of the fieldsman, Adam Voges, before being caught. Hence a review should have seen him given not out. (Bizarrely this has happened to Bairstow before, in Mumbai in 2012 when he was “caught” at silly point by Gautam Gambhir.) Two balls later Ben Stokes, driving airily, was caught at slip, another exasperating stroke.
Another three day-finish beckoned but finally Jos Buttler offered Cook some meaningful support. He batted with more composure than at any time in the series. He was watchful but positive in defence, especially against Lyon, who has tormented him throughout. However, unless the weather makes a major intervention the game is up.
All the while the Australians relaxedly turned the screw and, if they paused to think, they must have started wondering how they could have surrendered this series so rapidly. On a cloudless day Michael Clarke probably made more bowling changes per over than any Test captain in history.
So England had batted a little more appropriately than in the first innings, but even with the Ashes regained there is plenty for them to contemplate. Indeed the best time to highlight shortcomings and areas ripe for improvement is in the glow of a series victory.
It cannot be guaranteed that Trevor Bayliss has already quoted the American philosopher Elbert Hubbard to his team – that would be more in the style of John Buchanan, the coach of the Australia side in the early 2000s, who had a habit of quoting the wisdom of Sun Tzu to the raised eyebrows of Mark Waugh and Shane Warne. Hubbard said “responsibility is the price of freedom” and this might be something for Cook’s side to ponder.
The England team has been given their freedom this summer and that has been a wonderful thing. They have been encouraged to take the brakes off. Back in May Cook urged his men “to show off your skills”. This has prompted a remarkable summer, in which England’s cricketers have often brought a smile to our faces. There have been two enthralling Tests against New Zealand and the Ashes regained. It would be churlish to complain too much after all the misery of the previous 18 months.
But if England are to become a really good side some responsibility has to be allied to this glorious, new-found freedom. To be more prosaic: they cannot bat like they did on Friday and expect to be hailed as the potential dominant force of the late 2010s. There were too many soft dismissals, often from ill-conceived pull shots. That was more playing with a lazy, fuzzy flabbiness than with freedom.
On Saturday there was a bit more grit on view, more of a sense of responsibility. Old Elbert, not to mention Trevor, would have been a little happier about that.
