Alastair Cook: Stuart Broad has Marnus Labuschagne struggling with himself

What separates a great batsman from a good one? Playing with time, going big – 150 and more – once they are well set, the ability to handle all attacks in all conditions. These are all valid metrics. But there’s something else: how quickly he can drag himself out of a slump.

Even the best go through slumps and right now that is what Marnus Labuschagne is experiencing. From appearing as an injury replacement for Steve Smith at Lord’s in August 2019 through to the start of this summer he averaged 62. In his past four Tests, he averaged 26. If he can’t reverse this decline in the next two matches then Australia’s chances of winning the series are significantly reduced.

Credit to England because they have bowled brilliantly to him – literally from the first ball, when Stuart Broad dismissed him at Edgbaston. Before the series, Broad said he had developed an outswinger with which he was going to target Labuschagne and Smith, and I wonder if that is playing on his mind.

Every professional takes his cricket seriously but Labuschagne seems particularly intense. When he is not playing he spends a lot of his time watching and thinking about the game. I’m not saying England have got inside his head but in Australia’s second innings in the third Test at Headingley he looked like a man struggling with himself – and his dismissal reflected that.

Stuart Broad has tormented Marnus Labuschagne this series. Picture: Mike Egerton/PA Images via Getty Images

His batting on that Friday afternoon was symbolic of the Australian cautiousness which allowed England back into the game. Having established a first-innings lead (albeit a slender one after Ben Stokes’s pyrotechnics), the tourists’ batting was too watchful. Until Travis Head’s late onslaught, they allowed England’s attack to settle, desperate not to gift the home side an opening. In fact, it proved their undoing.

It reminded me of England’s mentality in the third Test in Perth in 2010. We were 1-0 up, having scored a combined 1,137 runs for six wickets in our previous two innings, and bowled Australia out for 268 on day one. At that point, we seemed to think it was just a case of playing within ourselves to retain the urn.

It doesn’t work like that. In the Ashes, you have to go out and win it, especially with so little between these two sides. We can be certain that Stokes’s England will start by looking for the positive option but what about when a tight win in Manchester hoves into view? The tantalising prospect of levelling the series and taking all the momentum into the decider could affect them in the same way that Australia went into their shells at Leeds.

England won a thrilling third Test to keep the series alive. Picture: Stu Forster/Getty Images

Before the series, you would have taken it as read that James Anderson would play at his home ground, Old Trafford, for the fourth Test but the contrast between his displays in the first two Tests and those of the other pacemen has muddied the waters.

Anderson described the Edgbaston surface as “kryptonite” for his style of bowling and Lord’s didn’t offer much more assistance, so there’s a question mark over what pitch will be produced at Old Trafford. In my first Test there, against Pakistan in 2006, Steve Harmison picked up 11 wickets and Monty Panesar eight as we won by an innings. Since they realigned the pitches in 2013, the track has not been as bouncy, fast or dry. The weather for next week is not great so we may see conditions overhead that favour Anderson a little more.

Remember, too, that he was out for nearly a month with a groin injury before the first Test. In boxing they talk about turning old overnight but I don’t see that with him. He has been old for some time now yet has taken his wickets at an average of 24 in the past two years. With Broad, Chris Woakes and Mark Wood having done well at Leeds, you suspect he will replace Ollie Robinson.

James Anderson looks the odd man out in Ben Stokes’ England squad. Picture: Martin Rickett/PA Images via Getty Images

On the other big selection issue, I wasn’t surprised that the selectors stuck with Jonny Bairstow. The fact is that you are more likely to get a match-winning knock from him than you are from Ben Foakes (not that the Surrey man is a bad batsman).

I was a little surprised, however, to see Moeen Ali bat at No 3 last Sunday. There’s no doubt that keeping Harry Brook at No 5 played to his strengths and may have been the difference between victory and defeat. England understandably want to keep their established middle order settled. With Ollie Pope out, though, my response would have been to move Joe Root to No 3, Ben Stokes to No 4, with Brook, Bairstow and Moeen below them.

I know Joe is reluctant to move but the best sides have always had one of if not their very best bat in that position: Jonathan Trott when England became No 1, Ricky Ponting with Australia in the 2000s, Hashim Amla for South Africa when they beat England in 2012. Do we want Mo coming to the crease in the first over, as any No 3 must be ready to do?

That said, England’s opening pair haven’t done badly. Ben Duckett and Zak Crawley average just under 35 for the first wicket. You would have taken that at the start of the summer, especially when you consider that Pat Cummins, the Australia captain, has been exceptional and Mitchell Starc was back to his best on the final day at Headingley. Their dismissals have mostly resulted from errors of judgment. It is not as though their techniques have been exposed.