Ricky Ponting won the man-of-the-match award in Adelaide, making it two in a row, and that said almost as much about the manner of England’s defeat as it said about the victorious Australian captain.
His runs — 256 in the first Test and 191 in the second — had something to do with it, but it was his positive leadership which tilted the balance. And positive leadership was exactly the quality so notably lacking in England’s effort as they went two down in a series that is now probably beyond recovery.
On Tuesday, as the match proceeded to its inevitable conclusion, Freddie Flintoff did everything he could think of to drag England out of the deepening mire.
He rotated his limited bowling resources while trying to set the sort of fields that might impede Australia’s pursuit of a very unimposing target, but most of all he bowled his heart out, with goodness knows how many injections numbing the pain from that left ankle.
It was distressing to watch him in that final session, sending down ball after ball of immaculate length and focused aggression at who knows what personal cost, while at the other end his teammates failed to produce anything that might seriously inconvenience the opposition.
But leading by example is not enough in a game as sophisticated as Test cricket, and Flintoff was able to match neither the guile with which Ponting managed the game nor his skill at identifying the right moment to fire up his players.
Ponting had noted the attitude with which England approached that decisive final passage of play at the Adelaide Oval.
”They were hoping for us to make mistakes,” he said, ”rather than getting out there and doing something to win the match themselves.”
At the start of the day, when a draw seemed probable and an England win still a possibility, Australia’s attitude had been simple. ”It was all there for us to win,” Ponting said.
Seldom reluctant to identify and exploit the failings of others, the Australians have been quick to express their amazement at England’s strangely passive approach. For them, and for others, it has been symbolised by coach Duncan Fletcher’s reluctance to put his faith in the two bowlers who have made an impact in this year’s earlier series.
Many felt that Sajid Mahmood deserved to make the side ahead of Jimmy Anderson. Fletcher felt otherwise. But the case of Monty Panesar was different, in that the Sikh from Northamptonshire brought something genuinely new and extremely valuable to the team.
In Panesar, the English public recognised a fighter. They loved the sense of excitement he brought to the job of helping England to win cricket matches. There is something inherently dramatic about his presence, as there is about that of Shane Warne. Perhaps Panesar will never be a Warne, but how good it would have been to show a pride in the discovery of his skill and enthusiasm by using him to attack Australia from the off.
There is no sense of England players jousting for their places on a daily basis, as there is with the Australians. In Adelaide you could see Damien Martyn, Michael Hussey and Michael Clarke fighting to make an impact, knowing that in Perth one of them will probably have to make way for Shane Watson.
There is a fine line between instilling self-confidence and allowing players to enter a comfort zone, and England seem to be on the wrong side of it. — Â