Victory in Australia is the title of one of E.W. Swanton's accounts of an Ashes series here, and it will do nicely as well for the title of this post. You surely didn't think I was going to let the result of the Brisbane Test go by without a comment from me?
Comment from me: Hooray, Australia won conclusively, and I saw the whole thing.
But getting back to E.W. Swanton, that account was of the series in 1954-5, and as many have been pointing out, England lost at the Gabba then but still came back to win the series. As is also being much said these last couple of days, England lost the first Test at Lord's in 2005, yet recovered to take the Ashes in memorable fashion. Then again, one could remind people, if one wanted to - and I do want to, I do - that England have lost at Brisbane before and not gone on to win the series, but gone on to be trounced.
Like a person can be walking along and fall down; or be walking along and not fall down; or can start by falling down and not be able to get up; or can fall down and get up and start running. Or, in other words, nobody knows what's going to happen, and talking about 1954-5 and 2005, or about 2002-3, or about 1994-5, gets you nowhere.
On our way to the Gabba on the fourth day, Ian and I passed a fortune-teller's hut. Inside it with the fortune-teller was an England fan who'd stopped off to hear what she had to say. I wonder if she predicted the outcome of the series.
Whatever she told him, it probably had more point to it than this little number from Mike Selvey:
To Stuart Clark went the final wicket, that of Steve Harmison caught at long leg, to spark Australian celebrations of only their second victory in the last seven matches against England. [Emphasis added.]Seven? Why seven? If you take the last Ashes series, of 2005, and the Test just completed at the Gabba, it's six. But in that case England have also only won two from six. If, however, you add on to the beginning of this sequence the final Test from the 2002-3 series, a Test which England won, then England have three from seven to Australia's two from seven. That's why seven. But what a dumb game that is. Because once you're going back before 2005, you might as well add the whole of the 2002-3 series. It's more logical. In which case you've got a sequence of 11, of which Australia have won six and England only three. Even better: you could start in the summer of 1989. Doing that, what you get is that Australia have won 30 Tests to England's nine.
Gabba, Gabba, Gabba, Gabba, Gabba, Gabba, Gabba, said the monkey to the chimp.
I don't know what's going to happen any more than you do, but I think it will be harder fought than most of this first Test might have suggested. The fourth day indicated as much. England need to play Monty Panesar and to drop James Anderson. Andrew Strauss needs to remember that his job as an opener is to stick around.
Gideon Haigh is blogging about the series at Cricinfo.
Rod Marsh calls the England set-up a shambles.
Why are cricketers such good dancers? (Thanks: JB.)
Tomorrow, I go to Adelaide.