Dunkirk or delaying the inevitable?

Like being saved from a rampant lion by Charlie Hawtrey, England were rescued by a couple of unlikely heroes at Cardiff.

Jimmy Anderson and Monty Panesar resisted for the last 69 deliveries of the match to salvage a draw that looked most unlikely for much of the final day.

When they came together, England still required six runs just to make Australia bat again. They played admirably straight, however, and by watching the ball hard, leaving astutely and using soft hands, enjoyed a fair portion of luck to take their side to safety.

Sadly, the dramatic ending was marred by allegations of gamesmanship. Firstly Kevin Pietersen was involved in a silly display of macho posturing with Mitchell Johnson during morning practise when the former struck a ball close to the Australian bowlers. The pair squared up before Johnson was pulled away by Stuart Clark.

Then, in the dying minutes of the game, England sent on their 12th man and, on one occasion, their physio, in what was clearly an attempt to kill time. The umpires ordered both off the pitch and Anderson, to his great credit, also appeared disinclined to engage in the charade.

Ponting was unimpressed. He declared the tactics “pretty ordinary” and said Australia would “play by the spirit of the game and leave England to do whatever they want.”

In truth, however, it is hard to imagine any international side not employing exactly the same approach.

Besides, Ponting’s curious tactics also helped England. The Australian skipper ignored his best bowler, Ben Hilfenhaus, for much of the day and instead relied on the part time spin of Marcus North to complement the honest but limited Nathan Hauritz in the dying overs. He over-bowled the unimpressive Mitchell Johnson, too, in the last hour and, in his desire to squeeze in more overs, concentrated more on quantity than quality. It is unthinkable England could have escaped had Australia still had the services of a certain blond-haired leg-spinner.

But perhaps England’s real hero was Paul Collingwood. He resisted for nearly six hours – 245 deliveries – to rescue England from the depths of 90-5. As his captain said afterwards “he’s a tenacious little red head and fighting is the only way he knows. It just underlines his importance to the side.”

Australia did have a chance to dismiss him early. He should have been caught, on 11, by Hussey off Haurtiz. It dropped just short only because Hussey was far too deep at short-leg. Had he clung on, Australia would surely have won.

But nobody embodied this contest better than Graeme Swann. He was battered during his 63-ball stay – outclassed and out of his depth – but he refused to take a backward step. Four times he was struck on the head, hand or body during a wonderfully hostile spell from Peter Siddle, but Swann defied Australia for over 80 minutes to play his part in the rescue job.

Both when Swann and Collingwood fell to poor stokes – Swann missing an ambitious pull off a straight and not terribly short delivery and Collingwood steering a wide one to point – England were back in the mire.

Until Collingwood and co’s heroics, however, Australia had seemed on course for a crushing victory. Indeed, the only two Englishmen who had showed the requisite fight and commitment were protesters who had rushed on to the field to complain about Ryan Air’s employment policies. One of them even managed to break the stumps; something none of the English seamers has done since the dawn of time.

For, while it may be tempting to select the positive elements of this result, England must not delude themselves: they were second best for nearly the entire game. Not only had almost two-thirds of a day’s play been lost to poor weather, but England’s toothless bowling and feeble batting had been exposed to one and all.

England, inevitably, will ‘take the positives’ from this result. They will talk of the Dunkirk spirit and look to rebuild at Lord’s. But the manner in which the bowlers were crushed – never before had four Australian batsmen scored centuries in the same innings of an Ashes Test – and the batsmen extracted, left very little room for optimism. It will take a miracle for England to regain the Ashes.

The most galling part of this performance, was that so much of it was self inflicted.

The Australians do not have an awesome bowling attack. It is disciplined and decent, yes, but it is some way from unplayable.

England’s batsmen simply made things far too easy. Cook and Bopara played across straight deliveries, Pietersen inexplicably left another one only to see it send his off-stump cartwheeling, Flintoff prodded at one he could have left and Strauss and Prior edged attempted cut shots, the latter to a ball that was too full and too close to him. It was poor batting.

Broad should have been adjudged leg before first ball – the hapless Doctrove must have been the only man on the ground who thought otherwise – while but Collingwood and Swann undid much of their good work by the manner of their dismissals. England were lucky to get away with it.

It looks unlikely they will make many changes, either, though a few of this team should endure a nervous night. All the bowlers disappointed and will have much to prove to show they can damage Test opposition. Adil Rashid, who at least offers more bite, and Steve Harmison, are the most likely new faces for Lord’s.

Alastair Cook will survive, but questions have to be asked after a poor performance. Had he not earned a lifeline by scoring a Test century on a painfully flat pitch in Barbados, Cook would have been dropped over the winter. His dismissals in this Test, fending well outside off stump in the first innings and playing across the line in the second, do not suggest he has the technique or temperament to prosper at this level.