ASHES SURRENDER

No camouflaging the chasm in ability between Australia and England in the women's Ashes

I am sorry if some elements of this article inflame sensibilities. Particularly the phrase on lines 3 to 5 – “it seems to me England have only three major problems, they can’t bat, they can’t bowl, and they can’t field.” It was of course written by the late, great Martin Johnson about England (men’s) lame early performances on the 1986/7 tour of Australia. But after their fourth loss in a row and a catalogue of elementary errors, it could equally be applied to England’s women Down Under. The women’s Ashes are now under Australian lock and key again for the foreseeable future.

There was a lot of hype preceding this tour about how England had their best chances in ages of regaining the Ashes. They had apparently closed the gap on the Aussies. Not on the evidence of the first four games of the tour they haven’t. The warnings were there after the first odi, which Australia won – by four wickets, but with 67 balls remaining, so more than ten overs – after which the victors declared that they were ‘disappointed’ by their performance. England missed a golden opportunity in the second game when Australia declined from 131-2 after only 24 overs to 180 all out. But England then collapsed themselves to 125-8 before eventually mustering 159. By the time of the third odi, when Australia pilloried over 100 runs off the last 10 overs to set England an unassailable target of 309, the gap between the teams was already a chasm.

The captain Heather Knight has tried to stay positive, though with each pronouncement that England just need to ‘be better at recognising and seizing key moments’ she has sounded less and less convincing. The fact is that the Australians are fitter, sharper, more talented and have more depth. England are outclassed in every department – a politer version of the Johnson quote.

And there are parallels with the men’s game. Watching England women stumble to their fourth defeat in the first T20 today at the Sydney Cricket Ground, I was reminded of all those times England’s men ventured to Australia in the 1990s and 2000s talking positively about their chances, only to be slowly and inexorably roasted on the Aussie barbeque. The fact is that at the time the Aussie men had a whole raft of players who would have walked into the English team but couldn’t get a game in Allan Border’s, Mark Taylor’s, Steve Waugh’s or Ricky Ponting’s XI, and the same is true of the Australian women now.

Horror-shot: Nat Sciver-Brunt bowled by Alana King at the SCG

It is not about handling pressure. It is not an issue of mental toughness. It is about physical prowess and ability. Many of the Australians hit strongly straight, down the ground with a dominant top hand. That is a product of their pitches and their coaching. English women hit mostly across the line with a lot of bottom hand. It is a product of their (inferior) pitches and coaching. The Australian seamers bowl a heavier ball with cleverer variations. Their spinners give the ball a proper rip. Nat Sciver-Brunt’s dismissal today to a long-hop from Alana King was woeful, but the ball did at least spin significantly. The Aussie fielders are all athletic and sharp with clean handling and good throwing arms. This is déjà vu. It’s exactly what we wrote about the Australian men 25 years ago.

Going back to 1986, Martin Johnson soon had egg on his face, when England surprised everyone – including themselves – by winning not only the first Test in Brisbane, but the series too. It is what made his original line so infamous. But I can’t honestly see Knight’s England emulating that by winning the one-off Test. They will have to bat, bowl and field out of their skin to achieve that. And even if they do, the coaching of female cricketers in England needs a total overhaul.

For comprehensive coverage of the women’s Ashes subscribe to STORYLINES THE WOMEN'S CRICKET SHOW