In the end it was Mitchell Starc saving the day in the second Ashes Test as he did the first. In a series supposed to be defined by Australia’s fast-bowling Big Three, he has done the work as the sole member to make the starting line. With one English wicket left to fall and his tally on six for 46, he was on the brink of the remarkable feat of recording career-best figures for the fourth time in less than 12 months. Joe Root and Jofra Archer swung a few runs away to void that statistical note, but it was still another day (and night) of heavy lifting for the man who so far in this series has carried Australia’s burden.
Having passed Harbhajan Singh’s 417 Test wickets in the process Starc, who ended day one with figures of six for 71, is now in the top 15 wicket-takers on the Test all-time list, but the more significant milestone from the overtaking lane was the 414 of Wasim Akram, making Starc the most prolific left-arm quick of all. Until now Wasim has been uncontested as the greatest of his ilk, but with time yet ahead of Starc, the Australian can now make an argument of it. He may average three more runs per wicket, but has needed eight fewer deliveries to take each one, and his recent vintage years have both of those numbers moving in the right direction.
Starc’s efforts stemmed the damage but didn’t entirely avoid it, with England ending the day on a score of 325 for nine that could be competitive even without addition if they get their other suit right. As in Perth, Australia’s backup quicks were largely ineffective. Scott Boland and new inclusion Micahel Neser bowled some impressive spells early, but only got one wicket each to show for it. Boland got belted in his later spell, while Cameron Green and Brendan Doggett went at five an over throughout.
So while Starc has been zooming past milestones, spare a thought for Nathan Lyon, who started the summer needing two wickets to pass Glenn McGrath’s 563, and still does. Barely needed in Perth in the haste of England’s collapses, he has now been left on the sidelines of this match for no discernible reason. It is difficult to understand how professional decision-makers can talk themselves into choosing five fast bowlers for nearly any situation. Going to the cricket without a spinner is like going to the cricket without a box: you might not need it, but you’ll be bloody sorry if it turns out you did.
There are often assessments that a pitch or a ball or a format will suit fast bowling. That doesn’t mean that a team needs every bowler to be of one type and none to be of the other. Variety can prove an effective weapon on any surface. When playing an England team that treats six-hitting against spin as a requirement of religious faith, an opponent should welcome that on a ground where each hit needs to travel 80 metres. The first few might, but the sequence cannot hold.
If a pitch will be helpful for quicks, it stands to reason that you’d need fewer of them, not more. If a pitch instead requires toil, that is a spinner’s job. In the end, this wasn’t a fast-bowling paradise. There was bounce: some lovely elevation with the new ball, where even Neser’s pace in the low 130s had Alex Carey’s gloves up at clavicle height. A little swing, particularly early. Moments of lateral movement, when Starc had the new ball wobbling like a drunk being ordered to walk a highway line.
But when England players applied themselves, in contrast to the self-destruction of half of their top six, there were runs to be had. There were tough overs to be bowled. And with Starc being held back for the dusk session after his early burst of two wickets in two overs, there was no variety in the right-arm seam attack that bedded Joe Root beautifully into what became his unbeaten hundred, not to mention keeping Australia at an appalling 74 overs in the day, denying themselves the option of a new ball to end the evening session.
Lyon has played all three pink-ball matches in Brisbane before this one. He started with 40 overs in a match, then 25, then 50. Safe to say he has not been found surplus to requirements. Doggett is promising but had played one Test and taken five wickets, where Lyon can add two zeroes to each of those tallies. Neser had played two Tests for seven wickets. No conditions could be extreme enough to bridge that gap.
Had Lyon played, England might have been all out for less, or they might have made hundreds more. Who knows? The point is that the logic is faulty, leaving out someone who has consistently been a performer in pink-ball cricket, let alone across the rest of a vast career. In the end, the fact that Australia came through the day in reasonable shape is down to Starc once again filling in for a full attack, not to the selections that made up the rest of it.
