Richard Hinds: Australian cricket team deserves to be blasted

DURING a dismal Ashes campaign, it has been easy to work out what the Australians were doing wrong.

DURING a dismal Ashes campaign, it has been easy to work out what the Australians were doing wrong.

Especially as the batting collapsed like George Rose on a cheap banana lounge.

Poor techniques. Poor shot selection. Poor temperaments. Pour us a drink.

After the Debacle of Durham, the Australians deserved the scathing criticism they received.

Indeed, a withering critique was encouraged by coach Darren Lehmann, who virtually grabbed the pens and notebooks of reporters in his post-match press conference and scrawled the words: ‘’Everyone is on notice!’’

But, after a rough night, it’s usually better to look at a cover photo of George Clooney than study your own crusty face in the bathroom mirror.

Or, as two most recent Olympics have proven, to learn from the winner, rather than mulling over your own sorry fate.

Left eating Australia’s dust at the Olympic and Commonwealth Games, the English - and, when it suited, British - replicated our methods. Talent identification, centralised academies, imported coaches. The same as us but, given British sport’s vast lottery funding, even more so.

This led, at the London Olympics, to the laughable complaints of Australian Olympic officials, and their media cheerleaders, who whined the English were ‘’stealing our coaches and techniques’’.

Which, given Australia had ‘’borrowed’’ so many coaches, training programs and even athletes from elsewhere, was like a bank robber complaining about a pickpocket.

A comb and a tube of moisturiser isn’t going to Clooney-ise the average male. But there are plenty of things Australia can learn from English cricket, besides which end of the bat to grip.

The impact of coach Duncan Fletcher, and his equally dour successor Andy Flower, has been profound. Both are tough nuts clearly in the job for more than just the flyer miles and the free hotel shampoo. Both are strong interventionists.

With the Australian opening batsmen cruising in the second innings at Chester-le-Street, Flower sent a stream of messages to his captain. This prompted Shane Warne to tweet: ‘’Eng coach now sending messages out to Cook. Is it the under 10s? Mmmmm.’’

Which is consistent with Warne’s view of coaching, apparently inherited from Ian Chappell, who once observed: ‘’The only coach a team needs is the one that takes them to the ground.’’

Michael Clarke is an intuitive captain. But if Darren Lehmann can see something he cannot, I’m hoping he has the 12th man out with an energy drink and a message before you can say, ‘’Get a leg slip in!’’

Australia had already sacked one coach, even before going 0-3 down. So it must be hoped Lehmann has merely inherited the problem, and has the hard edge to solve it.

England’s specialist coaching is also impressive. Arriving at Chester-le-Street at 7.45am, you found batting coach Graham Gooch doing throw-downs to a tailender with a device more often used for exercising dogs. Gooch’s famous work ethic, no doubt, has a lasting impact on his team.

This is not to say the Australian coaches are not doing their jobs. Just that, when the results are not apparent, it is worth benchmarking against the best.

England’s selection has seemed easy. The same batting line-up, just one bowling change, in four Tests.

On the other hand, Australia’s first class batting averages suggest we don’t have any socks to pull up.

Then you consider Chris Rogers. Hardworking, successful at first class level, yet overlooked for years because there were others ahead of him; then because, supposedly, he ‘’didn’t fit in’’.

Ian Bell, a once modest and inconsistent contributor, has scored three Test centuries in this series and 20 overall. Had Rogers’ temperament and intelligence been backed, as Bell’s has been by England, he might have had a career almost as substantial as the Englishman’s.

Chairman of selectors John Inverarity had a hand in Bell’s development when coach of Warwickshire. Hopefully, he can find another like him with an Australian passport. And pick him.

Then again, England has proven that a talented player who genuinely ‘’doesn’t fit in’’ should not be instantly discarded. Step forward Kevin Pietersen who, in the realms of sporting narcism, can make Shane Watson look like Michael Hussey.

Despite his disloyal text messages to the opposition, England have re-embraced - if not quite re-educated - Pietersen, and reaped the rewards.

You get the feeling the former South African will always be considered something of a necessary evil, as the rolled eyes of the English fieldsmen betray when Pietersen makes a half-hearted effort.

But conflict in any team is inevitable. The ability to resolve it, and form mutually beneficial working relationships, only makes a team stronger.

And yes, I can hear you. There is a gap in class and experience between the teams. But it is not as great as the results in this Ashes series have suggested.

England simply do a lot of little things better. As a result, kicking sand in Australian faces is one of them.