Nelson's Column: A worrying state of affairs

The news that 50% of all the professional cricketers in England would consider ditching international cricket to play in the IPL is confirmation of the fears many of us held when the Indian extravaganza was first announced.

It is truly shocking for the future of the game that the true test of a cricketer's ability should be usurped by the razzmatazz of a 20-over slog.

What is cricket without the supreme Test achievements of men like Sir Don Bradman, Sir Viv Richards, Sir Garfield Sobers, Brian Lara, Shane Warne and the rest? None of these will be remembered for their limited overs or Twenty20 ability. Furthermore, not one of today's players would be real stars without first showing their class in the ultimate form of the game.

Would the luminaries listed above have allowed their heads to be turned by the prospect of mega bucks? Probably, nay certainly. But not at the expense of Test cricket. And that is the crux of the problem here.

The two games have to work alongside each other. Twenty20 has attracted new fans and is often thrilling entertainment, but it cannot take precedence over Test cricket. The authorities must make pronouncements that back up this view, otherwise cricket, led by the cash-hungry Indian Cricket Board, will drown in its own indulgence.

Nelson's Column: It's not cricket

Is KP out of order or one of cricket's great innovators? That's the question which is dividing the glorious game as the MCC's top brass meet to discuss Kevin Pietersen's 'switch-hitting' that helped England to thrash New Zealand in the first ODI.

The guardians of the laws of cricket are considering the legality of Pietersen's ability to switch his grip and stance which essentially enables him to turn from a right to a left-hand batsman as the bowler approaches the crease.

Not surprisingly, Pietersen has dismissed criticism of his improvisation as "ridiculous". And his supporters argue that cricket needs great entertainers who shouldn't be hamstrung by petty laws and and out-of-date conventions.

But like many things in cricket, the issue is much more complex than it first appears. For a start, unlike the bowler, a batsman doesn't have to notify the umpires and opposition if he opts to reverse his batting style.

And the switch shot raises serious questions for umpires about the lbw and leg-side no-ball/wide laws. At present virtually any delivery which goes down the leg-side in one-day cricket is called a wide, but there's a potential conflict about identifying one if batsmen reverse their stance as the ball is bowled.

Michael Atherton rightly believes that a change in the laws is required to ban the switch-hit in order to maintain the delicate balance between bowler and batsman. Without such a change, the art of bowling to a well-set field will be all but lost, sacrificed on the altar of sporting showbiz.

And what's to stop a bowler checking his run-up if he thinks a batsman is about to change his stance? You can imagine the scene: four needed off the last ball and millions of pounds at stake on the outcome. The batsman shimmies and the bowler stops in mid-action to readjust his field.

Back he goes to his mark and the same thing happens again - and again. Great showbiz maybe, but not cricket.

What do you think? Should KP's switch-hitting be outlawed? Or is he the best thing that's happened to English cricket in recent years? Have your say via the boxes below.

Nelson's Column - No thanks, Sir Allen

This is the face of the man who flew into Lord's by helicopter on Wednesday morning to fundamentally change the landscape of English cricket.

It's the man who in November will make our cricketers instant millionaires. It's the Texan billionaire to whom the ECB have eagerly and reverentially said: "Yes, Sir Allen".

Sir Allen Stanford has arranged an annual Twenty20 match between England and a West Indies All-Star team, the winners of which will get $1m per man.

Coming so swiftly after the announcement of the Twenty20 Champions League, and just months after the inaugural IPL tournament, it's further proof that the crash-bang-wallop version of the game will take precedence - if not erode or even eventually destroy - the traditional formats of the sport.

The reason for that, of course, is money. Far from hiding this, Stanford and the ECB celebrate it - the press conference to unveil details of the Antigua jamboree was conducted in front of a guarded tank containing $20million in cash.

Does anyone else find this utterly vulgar and unpalatable? When the focus is on the money rather than the sport, aren't we left with something soulless and distasteful, devoid of all the elements that made, for example, England's 2005 Ashes victory so emotionally satisfying?

The purists are worried about the future of Test cricket (fears which Stanford did nothing to soothe by calling the five-day game 'boring'). Some say Test cricket's future is guaranteed because of its popularity, but only in England and Australia does one see packed stadia at Test matches. Everywhere else - including, importantly, India - crowds only flock in for limited overs games. How long will the ICC resist these market forces and start to prioritise differently?

Modern cricketers will be licking their lips at these unprecedented and startlingly sudden rewards, but for those who value the soul, history and traditions of the game these are anxious times indeed.

Is cricket selling its soul? Is this influx of cash actually good for the game? Do you prefer Test or Twenty20 cricket? Tell us now using the boxes below.

Nelson's Column: England win series

So England have emphatically thumped New Zealand and all appears fine and dandy. Michael Vaughan's men lie third in the world with fourth-ranked South Africa to face.

But England aren't playing anything like the third best team in the world for long enough spells in Test matches. At Lord's they were unable to bowl out New Zealand twice in friendly conditions; at Old Trafford they were so so fortunate the Kiwis bottled it; and at Trent Bridge, a better side would not have allowed England to recover from 86 for five to 364 all out.

South Africa almost certainly would have won from the positions established by New Zealand in the final two Tests. Put simply, England cannot afford the horror sessions and nightmare days as seen in this short series.

Moores and the selectors have some thinking to do, particularly if Andrew Flintoff returns from injury. Simon Jones is taking bucket-loads of wickets and Steve Harmison and Matthew Hoggard also appear back on form. Can Stuart Broad - averaging around 40, but scoring runs - keep them out? Meanwhile, can Ian Bell and Paul Collingwood justify their places having scored just 77 runs between them in six innings?

We want to hear your views on England's series victory over New Zealand and who should face South Africa later in the summer. Use the boxes below to send in your thoughts.

Nelson's Column: Wright move

So Phil Mustard has been shunned by England for the Twenty20 and five one-dayers against New Zealand.

His absence from the squad has been criticised by those who see the Durham wicketkeeper/batsman as an England version of Adam Gilchrist.

But let's look on the bright side. The door is now open for Luke Wright to establish himself as the destructive top-order batsman that England have lacked since Marcus Trescothick's withdrawal from international cricket.

At 23, the Sussex all-rounder is one of the brightest rising stars on the circuit. He scored a half-century on his one-day debut against India in September, and bowled an excellent final over that earned England a tie in New Zealand earlier this year.

Mustard, along with Matt Prior, have failed to take their chance with England so far, and the selectors are spot-on in putting their faith in Wright.

And their decision to stick with Tim Ambrose is a sign that, at last, they are trying to achieve some sort of continuity.

What do you think? Is Wright the man to give England the boost they need in the top order? Or were the selectors wrong to leave out Mustard? Have your say in the boxes below.

Nelson's Column: England let off the hook

Had England lost to a ten (sometimes nine) man New Zealand side, not thought to be one of the greatest in the world, on a wicket which suited the home side's attack, it would perhaps have gone down as one of the most humiliating defeats in their history.

In the end, Michael Vaughan's men cruised to a famous six-wicket victory and should now go on to clinch the series at Trent Bridge next week. But all is far from sweet in the make-up and performance of the side.

Just a few questions that have arisen: Why does Monty Panesar only look a world-beater on helpful surfaces? Is it too soon for Stuart Broad as a bowler? Does Ian Bell ever score big runs under pressure? Can the horribly out of touch Paul Collingwood really justify a place in the top six? Is Tim Ambrose proving to be another false dawn as a batsman-wicket-keeper?

New Zealand will be pig sick. They should have killed England off on Sunday, but bottled it in the face of Monty's magnificence. England have got out of jail and they are lucky Australia don't arrive for another year.

Nelson's Column: Trouble for England

Is anyone else starting to worry? Despite bowling twice in very helpful conditions and batting under blue skies, England cannot claim a moral victory in the first Test.

Even if the weather had allowed the hosts a second innings, they may have been chasing 300 against the world-class off-spin of Daniel Vettori, who took five wickets in the first innings. There's no saying England would have got there on a wearing surface.

Though none of the bowlers performed poorly, the sameness of England's pace attack is a concern. There's no serious speed and, once the new ball had been seen off, New Zealand looked fairly comfortable.

Then there's the perennial underachievement of the top six as a unit. Andrew Strauss and Alastair Cook failed to turn fifties into hundreds in glorious conditions and the middle order was blown away. Michael Vaughan's ton, supported by the plucky Stuart Broad, rescued England from a humiliating first-innings deficit.

If I was in the New Zealand camp, I would be quietly confident ahead of the second Test.

What do you think? Have England got problems or do you see them proving too strong in the end for an inexperienced New Zealand side? Send in your views using the boxes below.

Nelson's Column: Lighten up!

If Test cricket wants to survive the challenge of the IPL invasion it can do without days like Friday. The most pure version of the game didn't just shoot itself in the foot, it flinged itself on a high-explosive bomb.

The thousands attending IPL games can be guaranteed entertainment and value for money. Conversely, those who forked out the average ticket price of £60 to watch England and New Zealand players sitting on a balcony in overcast conditions have every right to be furious.

Test cricket prides itself on tradition, but if authorities fail to ditch these absurd rules and regulations even English crowds will begin to stay at home.

It's not the players' fault. They have the option of protecting their averages and subsequently their careers or satisfying paying customers; they can hardly be blamed for walking off. But the telling observation that even Alastair Cook and Andrew Strauss didn't think the light was that bad, merely heightens the stupidity of it all.

The decision must be taken out of the players' hands. The ICC should instruct umpires to leave the field of play only if the conditions are dangerous.

Nelson's Column: Leave Flintoff out

A second successive duck has confirmed one thing; Andrew Flintoff should not be recalled to the England side to face New Zealand.

Freddie may have bowled with his usual excellence, but for England's long-term success, they need an all-rounder at six, not a bowler who bats at seven.

What on earth is the rush? Even without Flintoff in the attack, England must defeat a weak Kiwi outfit at Lord's. Surely it makes sense to give him time to get some runs under his belt with Lancashire.

Only with Flintoff excelling with the willow at six can England rediscover the form of 2004-05.

The selectors won't see it this way - it's an absolute guarantee. Are they worried that runs or wickets from the man/men that Flintoff could replace will make it difficult for them to bring him back later in the summer?

Tough. Selectors are paid to make big decisions. Flintoff must return at some point - that's obvious. But not now.

Is it too early for Flintoff or does his bowling warrant a recall in itself? Send in your views using the boxes below.

Nelson's Column: Ravi stands firm

Well said Ravi Bopara! In explaining his decision to turn down a lucrative offer to play in the Indian Premier League, the Essex all-rounder said he wanted to regain and cement his place in the England team.

Bopara admitted that he had been tempted by the money but wanted to put his county first. "My goal is to play regularly for England so I am confident that if I continue to score runs and take wickets for Essex then I will hopefully play for England this summer and for many years to come," he said.

Bearing in mind that Bopara isn't centrally contracted by the ECB and is thus free to sign with the IPL if Essex agree, his decision and wise words come as a breath of fresh air amid the get-rich-quick mentality that's threatening to tear the game apart.

Contrast his stance with the views of Shane Warne, who has once again criticised the ECB for preventing centrally-contracted players from featuring in the IPL.

Warne, who captains and coaches the Rajasthan Royals, said: "If the Poms don't want to play, well so be it. It's still a good spectacle without them. But it would be better with them. Hopefully everyone gets their head out of the sand and they allow their individuals to play and look at the bigger picture."

Warne added that if the ECB were to change its mind, IPL teams would be queueing up to sign the best English talent, with Andrew Flintoff certain to be top of the 'most wanted' list.

And therein lies a problem. All-rounders will tend to be in highest demand for the Twenty20 game, marginalising other skills such as those of the out-and-out opening batsman or bowler.

The ECB is right to adopt a cautious approach for all sorts of reasons, not least because Test cricket must remain the jewel in their crown. Without it, the game is in danger of losing its very soul. And you don't jump on a gravy train until you know where it's going.

Is Bopara to be praised for putting Essex and England first? Or is Warne right to criticise the ECB for adopting a cautious approach over the IPL? Have your say in the boxes below.

Nelson's Column: Key issues

Robert Key has confounded his many critics with a sparkling return to form and fitness that has earned him the captaincy of a strong England Lions squad to face New Zealand at the Rose Bowl on 8 May.

But eyebrows shouldn't be raised too much. Key, whose Test career looked to be over after a hit-and-miss tour of South Africa in 2004-05, had a fine season for Kent last year and he has carried that form into the new campaign with a vengeance.

He massacred the Kiwi attack at Canterbury on Monday, hitting 178 not out in a first-day total of 324-1. And let's not forget that Key plundered twin centuries against New Zealand on their last tour of England in 2004.

If he continues to shine both with the bat and as captain of Kent and the Lions, then Michael Vaughan's position could be called into question sooner rather than later.

Vaughan's form with the bat so far this season has been far from impressive, and questions remain about the injuries that have plagued his career in recent years.

And so Key, who impressed as skipper of England A against Sri Lanka and Pakistan, has rightly been handed the chance to enhance his case for a Test recall and who knows, for the captaincy too.

It's a far cry from those days at the turn of the century when Key weighed in at 16 stone and was derided for his expanding waistline.

Does Key deserve a Test recall? Or even the full England captaincy? Have your say via the boxes below.

Nelson's Column: The future's pink

A new and more garish era has dawned in cricket, and it's got nothing to do with the Indian Premier League.

No, this time we're talking balls - pink ones. The MCC, once a bastion of be-suited stuffiness, has brought a dash of colour to the glorious game by introducing the pink cricket ball. It was trialled this week at Lord's when the MCC took on Scotland in a 50-over friendly, replacing the white variety that has become the norm in limited-overs cricket.

While traditionalists may quake at the very thought of pink being the chosen colour, there are good reasons for the change. The white ball has been a bone of contention among players and umpires for some time, mainly because it's not very durable and becomes grubby pretty quickly, especially on hard pitches and outfields.

Dr Anthony Bull, a bioengineer from Imperial College, is working with manufacturers Kookaburra to come up with a ball which is both durable and visible.

The problem is that while the traditional red ball is dyed in a protective paraffin wax, other colours such as white or pink have to be painted on, making them liable to become scuffed and frayed more quickly.

Dr Bull's dream is that he will be able to come up with a pink variety that can withstand the crash-bang-wallop cricket that's becoming increasingly popular.

If he and his colleagues are successful, the pink ball could well become the missile of choice in all forms of cricket. Yes, even in Tests.

What do you think? Is this a step too far, or should cricket move with the times and new technology? Send us your comments via the boxes below.

Nelson's Column: The beginning of the end?

Should we be terrified or excited by the IPL which kicks off today when the wonderfully-named Bangalore Royal Challenge collide with the Kolkata Knight Riders?

The money-drenched frenzy of slogging represents the biggest threat to the traditionalists since Kerry Packer's World Series. Mind you, merely changing the carpet colour is a seismic shift for many cricketing establishments.

The IPL will undoubtedly alter the landscape. The ICC's relentless, energy-sapping Future Tours Programme will have to be adapted to accommodate the stars. If this seems like a positive, the thought that Test and ODI cricket could be marginalised as top players seek easy riches rather than tough runs is, quite blatantly, not.

What IPL supremo Lalit Modi does with the absurdly lucrative rewards is another concern. The BCCI is already, in many people's eyes, far too big for its boots. A few billion more rupees could easily turn the monolith into a law unto itself.

However, the new league is undoubtedly an intoxicating prospect; the world's greatest players performing in front of throbbing stands of Indian fans with an insatiable appetite for the quick-fire forms of cricket. It cannot and will not simply go away. The concept has to be embraced to a certain extent, but administrators must forcefully guard against any degradation of Test cricket.

What are your views on the IPL? Will it destroy Test cricket? Is cricket becoming more and more like football? Have you lost faith in the game? Send in your thoughts using the boxes below.

Nelson's Column: New cricket blog!

As Benjamin Franklin never said, there are three certainties in life; death, taxes and a hundred for Mark Ramprakash in county cricket.

His unbeaten 102 against Lancashire yesterday makes it 98 and counting for Surrey's ridiculously prolific run-getter. But even if he reached three figures in every game this season, declared his hatred for the IPL and taught Peter Moores how to dance, Ramprakash won't be called up for the first Test against New Zealand. He's perhaps the best batsman in the country, but that doesn't mean a thing in the peculiar minds of the selection panel.

Ramprakash was actually dropped on nought off the bowling of Andrew Flintoff, who made a welcome return to action. He delivered 10-and-a-half miserly overs and snared the wicket of Scott Newman. There was no sign of any injury (nor a pedalo) and there's no doubt a fit Freddie will be fast-tracked into the Test side. But is it too early?

Another Ashes hero Simon Jones captured a wicket with the sixth ball of his championship debut for Worcestershire in three lively overs. The unlucky Owais Shah proved once again he could bat as well as carry a drinks tray with 116 while Robert Key made 79 in a scene of carnage at Canterbury. All in all, it was a great opening day in the freezing cold for some of England's finest.

Send in your views to our regular cricket blog using the boxes below. Should Ramprakash earn one final swansong? Should Flintoff be picked - if fit? Must the selectors move on from The Ashes 2005 and ignore Jones?

England win in New Zealand... Your view

After many nervous nights, after countless twists and turns, England have done it. They've won their first Test series away from home since South Africa in 2005.

But the victory, reviewed here, has produced as many negative as positives. How on earth did England allow such a mediocre Test nation - shorn of the talented Shane Bond for the whole series and Jacob Oram and Kyle Mills in the final match - to come so close to causing a huge upset?

What does the future hold for Steve Harmison and Matthew Hoggard - and Michael Vaughan, if his current lack of form continues? What can be done about England's frail batting line-up which too often fails to deliver big centuries?

Perhaps it's best to focus on the fabulously consistent performances of Ryan Sidebottom - England's man of the series by a country mile - and the promising start made by Stuart Broad. Even Monty Panesar is back taking wickets!

Send in your thoughts on the above and anything other cricket-related matters using the boxes below.

Cricket blog: Shameful England

In 1999, England scraped the most grotty of barrels with a despicable series defeat at home to New Zealand. Today, a depressing symmetry of sorts was 'achieved'. In less than three years since that win over Australia, Michael Vaughan's men have regressed to the spineless, dispiriting rabble of the late 20th century.

England's display in the 189-run defeat to New Zealand must rank among their worst in Test history. Not only have they lost by a mammoth margin to a side recently humiliated in South Africa and missing their best fast bowler, they've done it in a style so far removed from the heady entertainment of 2005, it almost feels like that glorious summer was a ridiculous dream.

Can Peter Moores be blamed? Aside from his extraordinarily astute selection of Ryan Sidebottom, the only man who can hold his head up high, he's changed little (by choice) from the latter days of Duncan Fletcher's regime. But the manner of performances as well as results have declined steadily since last summer. If he's not feeling the pressure following this abject surrender, he damn well should be. His job's on the line.

Coaches don't win or lose matches, though. Cricket, more than most team sports, largely comes down to the individual. And too many of them look short of Test class, out of nick, mentally shot or all three.

Steve Harmison is an easy target, but he simply isn't mentally tough enough for Test cricket - and never has been aside from one freak year. England simply cannot keep "Waiting for Godot". If you've read or seen the play, you'll know he never comes. Stuart Broad must play in Wellington.

On current form, many of the rest should join Harmy on the sidelines, but what is there to bring in? James Anderson perhaps? Surely Matthew Hoggard is allowed an off-day. No, it's the batsmen who have principally let the side down with their lamentable run-rate, indecision and final-day choke. They don't score hundreds, don't adapt to conditions, don't show intent and don't justify their reputations. But they'll all keep their place. After all, Moores tells us they are "world class". And he's not joking.

Is Peter Moores on borrowed time? What should England do before the second Test in Wellington? Send in your views now!

by Chris Dempster (written at 2am in depressed state)

England in Sri Lanka... Your view

Defeat to India at home and now a woeful performance in Sri Lanka have dropped England's cricketers down to fifth in the ICC World Rankings.

Now the series is over, we've rated each player's performance here. After reading our views, we now want to hear yours. Using the boxes below, why not let us know if we've been too harsh? Perhaps the ratings are overly generous. Who do you think should be dropped and brought in for the tour of New Zealand? Is Peter Moores the man to take England forward?

Cricketing tales... Your view

England return to Sri Lanka today for a quick-fire three-Test series in December. Their departure got us thinking about the great tales from cricketing tours.

We've picked out 10 of the best (click here), but want you to suggest alternatives. Have we forgotten any blinders? Did you see any in progress yourself? Have you had ever been at the same pub or club as famous cricketers?

Click here to send in your views.

Party's over for Freddie

Posted by Mike Dale

'Life is a carnival,' is the slogan of this Cricket World Cup. It seems Andrew Flintoff is not sure where the partying stops and the hard work and responsibility of representing your country begins.

This morning's tabloid revelations probably raised a chuckle in many households. A lads' night out to a crap nightclub and a 4am paddle in a stolen pedalo; we've all done it, haven't we? Boys will be boys.

However, this story has been like a dam bursting. Cricket pundits have been only too eager to condemn him, talking of similar, previously-undisclosed incidents in Australia and offering comparisons with Paul Gascoigne and Geroge Best.

It seems Freddie has been treating recent tours like an extended stag do. Not just any tours - the Ashes and the World Cup.

Being dropped for the game against Canada caused a minor stir, but stripped of the vice-captaincy? Very clearly, something is afoot here.

Sports fans in this country love a jack-the-lad type who can hold his drink. It shows that despite being mega stars, they're really one of the boys and no different from the rest of us.

The difference is, we're not playing for England, we're not role models and we don't have pots of cash that leaves us open to nefarious influences and brings temptations wherever we turn.

Does today mark the beginning of the tragic self-destruction of a national sporting icon? The remainder of this World Cup provides the perfect platform for Flintoff to prove this is not the case.

England's renaissance inspires Caribbean dreams

By Mike Dale

"There is more chance of seeing Duncan Fletcher dancing naked on the Sydney Harbour Bridge than England reaching the one-day series final."

Who made a complete idiot of himself by writing that prediction? Well, it was me actually, in Orange World's live match commentary after England had been comprehensively beaten by New Zealand by 58 runs just over a fortnight ago.

Their resurgence since then has been one of the most extraordinary reversals of fortune in sporting history. To go from national laughing stock to world beaters in the blink of an eye is almost unprecedented.

Suddenly I'm looking forward to the World Cup. But what on earth are we to make of England's chances now?

Liam Plunkett, Sajid Mahmood and Ed Joyce fully deserve their seats on the plane to the Caribbean. Michael Vaughan and Kevin Pietersen's return from injury can only help. Paul Collingwood has proved himself one of the world's best middle-order batsmen and fielders, while Paul Nixon has provided a decent stop-gap solution to the problematic keeper's position by virtue of his glovework and enthusiasm (if not his batting).

More by luck than judgement, England have stumbled upon a winning formula. On the back of three successive wins over the world champions, surely we can permit ourselves to dream of a semi-final spot at least? Anything beyond that and we might see Duncan dancing after all.

The long wait is over

Posted by Chris Dempster

Put the flags out! England have won! Three words we had all lost hope of ever hearing on this miserable tour.

And what a surprise that almost as soon as Andrew Flintoff is relieved of the captaincy, we see a return of the real Freddie. A match-winning, run-a-ball 70 and two wickets as well.

Sadly with Michael Vaughan injured again, he'll probably be asked to skipper. Maybe Andrew Strauss should be given the job - but then that would be an admittance that the management got it wrong in the first place. And we all know England's hierarchy don't do silly things like that

Obviously doom and gloom will descend on Friday when we are crushed by Australia. They just look a million miles better than anyone in the world in Tests and ODI cricket. But at least we've regained an ounce of pride.

Glenn not guilty as charged

Posted by Richard Groom

Just when we thought it couldn't get any worse Down Under, up pops Glenn McGrath with a rib-tickler that puts England's best player out of the game for several weeks.

And, to rub salt in England's latest wound, there was old Pigeon smiling down the pitch as Kevin Pietersen doubled up in agony with a broken rib.

But don't knock McGrath. Pietersen has been brave and good enough to charge quick bowlers throughout his career.

McGrath saw what was coming, dug it in short and lured Kev into an attempted pull that backfired big time. Game, set and match to the bowler on this occasion.

Pietersen, quite rightly, says the injury won't stop him charging fast bowlers.

And despite being in obvious pain after yet another thrashing at the hands of the Aussies, KP made a point of speaking to McGrath on the field to thank him for the challenge he'd presented during the Ashes.

Now that's true sportsmanship from two of cricket's genuine tough guys.

The Ashes: lessons to be learned

Posted by Chris Dempster

With typical humiliation and embarrassment, The Ashes are thankfully at an end and all you can hear are the words ‘we must learn from it’.

So what can England learn?

It all dates back to the celebrations in 2005. MBEs, parades, lunches with the PM - what was all that about? They won a series, not a World War. Since then, we’ve been average. The squad thought that was it - job done. We have to re-discover that winning mentality.

Secondly, leave the partners and family at home until well into the tour and develop a win-at-all-costs, tight-knit mentality. Steve Harmison shouldn’t have to think about changing a nappy the night before the first Test.

Thirdly, turn up early, get used to conditions, get some decent practice. It’s basic stuff!

Fourthly, don’t pick men who haven’t played for a year. Oh, and don’t pick Geraint Jones or Chris Read - they’re rubbish. Bring back Alec Stewart!

And finally, rise to the challenge. Quite simply, Australia have played far better than us. Roll on 2009!

WonderWarne

Posted by Matt Ogborn

I haven't heard a variation of the Oasis classic Wonderwall that incorporates the Aussie spinning legend, however it seems doubly apt after yet another piece of Warne magic down under.

With England facing a whitewash humiliation that echoes the dog days of capitulation that we endured against the Mark Taylor and Steve Waugh sides, the bleach blonde leggie has stuck another sword in our rotting carcass.

This time, though, he used the desperate sledging from Paul Collingwood to fuel a gutsy knock of 71 in his final Test that put Australia firmly in the Sydney driving seat.

After dishing out American Pie 'Sherminator' insults to Ian Bell throughout the course of the series, Warne took Collingwood's insults on the chin to write another chapter in a fascinating career.

With England's top order doing their best to replicate a set of dominoes falling down on a greasy surface, it should take the hosts a matter of minutes to seal victory on the fourth day.

Where does this put England in the pantheon of woefulness that we have suffered over the years, the 1986/87 and 2005 victories apart?

Not quite at the bottom rung of the ladder, thanks to a team on paper that should have produced an Ashes classic - but not far off. The fact they should have competed almost makes it worse.

Let's just hope the likes of Andrew Strauss, Alastair Cook and Steve Harmison can bounce back from their poor form to trigger a World Cup charge.

If we can track down a wicketkeeper into the bargain whose cricketing hero isn't Buster Keaton and a seamer who can emulate Stuart Clark's form for Australia, we should be OK.

In the meantime, let's just sit back and raise a toast to Shane Warne. He's made the Ashes extra special over the years, got right under our skin and set the bar for all others to follow.

Whingeing Poms

Posted by Mike Dale

As if England’s pathetic innings defeat in the 4th Ashes Test wasn’t enough, Duncan Fletcher’s bleating about their leaked bowling plans just added to the embarrassment.

A Melbourne Cricket Club member found an A4 sheet of paper in the MCG bar containing details of England’s bowling plans to each Australian batsman. He promptly emailed it to local TV station ABC and suddenly Australia’s players knew exactly what was coming to them.

However, I doubt whether any of them even bothered to read the document. England’s bowling has been so insipid so far in this series, it’s hardly going to be revolutionised by a few indecipherable scribbles on a bit of paper.

But what an intriguing read it was. Fletcher’s plans to bamboozle Ricky Ponting, for example, went like this: “Tries to impose early with drive (nick/drive man) – Yorker?? (lbw-ct flicking through MW) – pulls in front of square in air (depth) – 5th slip when first in – straight mid-on – tight cover early on – backward point deeper if set??”

Erm, what? No wonder England’s bowlers have looked so bewildered and clueless. It’d be easier teaching them the theory of relativity.

Fletcher’s subsequent moaning about the “breach of security” and his demands for an official investigation into the leak just make us look even more pitiful. In just 18 months we’ve regressed from national heroes to the ‘whingeing Poms’ of the bad old days.

Shane Warne: legend

Posted by Chris Dempster

Thank God for that - Shane Warne is retiring! We might now have some hope of winning the Ashes next time in Australia.

With any luck, Glenn McGrath will retire too. And Ricky Ponting is getting on a bit. And that Mike Hussey is 31 and far too good for an old man.

The sight of Warne mesmerising our Pom batsmen has mentally scarred us 20-30 somethings – we have barely seen anything else in our cricket-watching lives.

But it has also been a privilege to witness the greatest ever bowler in Test cricket.

Every time he has the ball, it’s a mini-drama. His outrageous spin and variations, the appeals, the blonde hair – the look of amazement on Mike Gatting’s podgy face!

Thanks for the memories, Warney.

Out of Harm's way

Posted by Chris Dempster

Steve Harmison has ungracefully bowed out of ODI cricket - he claims it will prolong his nose-diving Test career.

What a joke! It’s no surprise he’s quit as soon as he is left out of the England ODI squad.

Rather than trying to improve at slog cricket, he’s run away from it. Geraint Jones can’t bat and can barely keep wicket but at least he didn’t cry like a baby and give up.

Harmison claims no-one tries harder in the nets and in the middle. This may be so – but does he really want it? I mean, really. Like Shane Warne. Like Andrew Flintoff.

Our star bowler, a match-winner apparently, has quit on the eve of the World Cup. Thanks a lot mate.

Ashes dream goes up in smoke

By Chris Dempster

Makes you sick, doesn't it?

Could England have made a worse defence of the Ashes? Duncan Fletcher should hang his head in shame. It's been a poorly managed tour so far, by anyone's standards.

Where was Monty Panesar in those first two Tests when Giles was clearly struggling? Is Geraint Jones really an international-class cricketer? Why have England played 22 Tests in the past 19 months, and Australia just nine?

The whole thing's been an absolute farce. An embarrassment.

Pietersen, Collingwood and Hoggard have done the business, Monty showed he's class...

...and Bell and Cook added some decent runs.

But England's main men - like Steve Harmison and Freddie Flintoff - just weren't at the races. What a letdown. Harmison, in particular, should have stayed at home.

And what have we got to look forward to? Two meaningless Tests and a one-day series that will surely bring yet more pain. And then it's on to the daunting task of a World Cup. The heady summer of 2005 seems like a long, long time ago...

Who or what do you blame for England's woeful Ashes showing? Fletcher? The players? Injuries? Leave your comments below.

Ashes to ashes...

The last thing anyone needs at seven in the morning is a text message relaying details of yet another England batting collapse against Australia. Rarely has a day begun so miserably.

Following the Adelaide debacle, it’s now inevitable that The Ashes will be handed straight back to the Aussies. Recriminations will be severe and questions have to be asked. If they thought Brett Lee’s barrage on day five was tough, just wait for the upcoming press conferences.

Fletcher has to bear the brunt for many of England’s failings Down Under. Leaving out Monty Panesar is plainly absurd. He may not have bowled out Australia single-handedly in either Test, but he carries much greater wicket-taking threat than Ashley Giles, Steve Harmison and James Anderson put together at the moment. Fletcher says England have to bat to eight like Australia. It’s flawed thinking. Australia’s eight is the world’s greatest bowler, who happens to be a handy batsman and brilliant slip fielder. If Shane Warne couldn’t take wickets, he wouldn’t be playing. Fact. Giles averages 20.89 in Tests - not bad, but is that really worth the extra wicket or two (at least) that Panesar would claim per game? And Monty CAN bat!

Harmison is a big worry. He hasn’t bowled well for two years and looks less and less like he wants to tour or even play cricket at all. He may as well be put on the same plane back to England as James Anderson. That poor chap hasn’t been fit for months - how can we expect him to rip out the Aussies? Sajid Mahmood has to play in Perth and Liam Plunkett may as well be given a go for all the good Harmison is doing.

Fletcher’s other big decision - recalling Geraint Jones for Chris Read - has also backfired. Fletch said Read couldn’t hack the pressure but could he really do any worse than Jones? If Read lacks mental toughness, his counterpart lacks composure.

Finally, the tactics to bat time rather than get runs on the board - denied by England staff - merely highlights the negative approach on this tour. At the heart of it all is Fletcher’s blindingly obvious belief that this squad won’t be able to take 20 wickets and can’t be trusted to score big runs. He’s employed defensive tactics and has paid a depressing but predictable price.

By Chris Dempster

Have England got the slightest hope of retaining the Ashes? Or is it all over for Freddie Flintoff's men? Leave your comments below.

Shape up or ship out

After watching the England tail chased into an early surrender in the first Test at the Gabba, you got that sinking feeling again when it comes to the national side and the Ashes urn.

Despite the fact that Duncan Fletcher's side went one down last year before rampaging back for a series victory at the Oval, there is a sense this time around will be an entirely different proposition.

One pointer was the sight of the England team coming out to congratulate the Australian victors in Vodafone sponsored pyjamas, ready for tucking in before the sun had even set in Brisbane.

Maybe if Fletcher can make up some tapes to play for Freddie Flintoff's team during their slumber with the words "backbone", "stop hooking Straussy" and "find your radar Harmy" we could bounce back.

One group of people who you couldn't fault were the Barmy Army, who backed their sorry mob until the final wicket when poor old Steve Harmison fended off Stuart Clark straight into Glenn McGrath's hands.

If they can keep up the decibel level in Adelaide come Friday, then Flintoff's crew might just be able to turn the tide with the wicket set to  be batsman friendly.

It made no sense to keep magical Monty Panesar in the pavilion at the Gabba, so let's hope Fletcher sees the error of his ways and brings him back to exploit the cracks in the Adelaide pitch.

With this in mind we could also see a runout for another Ashes nemesis in Stuart MacGill, whose phenomenal strike rate will strike further fear into England spinning in tandem with Shane Warne.

For the crowd at the Gabba, there was time for light relief in amongst the sound of England wickets being torn from the ground and Aussie batsmen clattering the boundary boards.

Eccentric umpire Billy Bowden was felled by a shot from England keeper Geraint Jones, much to the delight of the attending masses.

Having successfully parlayed his eccentricity to worldwide acclaim, Bowden's desire to "keep out of the spotlight" in this Ashes series has already bitten the dust much like England's defence!

By Matt Ogborn

Do you think England can step up a gear in Adelaide and get their Ashes campaign back on track? Or do you think they should be sent on the first ship home?

First blood to the Barmy Army

So it hasn’t been quite the start we were hoping in the Ashes, but here at Orange we’re looking on the bright side – and at least the Barmy Army have given us something to smile about.

While the majority of the Aussie press is crowing about their start to the first Test and laughing at England’s lacklustre showing, The Sydney Morning Herald is the unlikely source of good news for England fans as they give first blood to England in the battle of the fans.

England’s legendary Barmy Army had come prepared with 67-page glossy magazine of ‘Barmy Harmonies’ to make sure their presence was felt at the Gabba. Split into categories such as anthems, bowlers, allrounders, batsmen and, of course, convict songs, England’s travelling fans have a song for every occasion.

The Morning Herald quoted Barmy Army spokesman Andy Lulham as saying: “Our reputation is not just built on being loud and gregarious but in not abusing opposition players – there’s a subtle difference between piss-taking and abusing in case you wondered.”

Aussie fanatic Joey Angelucci admitted that the feeling was mutual, saying: “I love their chants. They’re pretty organised, that’s the best thing about them – it’s all good stuff.”

On a more serious note, it was great to see the first day pass without any of the crowd problems often associated with the Gabba – even though many fans were kept hanging around after the match started as increased security saw fans not allowed to bring backpacks into the ground.

By Michael Bell

What do you think of England's start to the Ashes? Or the performance of the Barmy Army for that matter? Leave your comments below

Freddie gets his war paint on

England captain Andrew Flintoff may hold the key to this winter's Ashes series but all the talk this week is not about his all-round cricketing abilities but the whopping tattoo on his right arm.

Never the most subtle of individuals – who can forget his beer swigging at No.10 at the end of last year’s series? – he has, in fact, practically covered his upper arm with the new art work.

According to the artist behind the work, Louis Molloy, he’s been planning it for “three or four months”.

Have a look for yourself but, according to Molloy, “in the scale of things, it isn’t such a big tattoo”...

Freddie’s been inked up before - following the birth of his two children, Holly and Corey…

But that sort of patriotism in sport is fairly standard stuff, as anyone who had their eyes open during the football World Cup will have noticed:

And despite that fella’s passion, he’s got nothing on last week’s International Tattoo Convention – no word of a lie – where body painting hit new levels:

Matt Majendie

So have you got a tatt you treasure? We want to see them! Email your pics to sporteditor@orange-ftgroup.com