Cricket: Australia must channel contract anger to progress against England

Australia go into their crucial game with England at Edgbaston in an aggressive frame of mind. So what’s new? Well, usually all their aggression is directed at the Poms but on this occasion some of it may be reserved for their own board.

David Warner is often the spokesman of their international players in the contractual dispute with Cricket Australia. On the face of it this seems as incendiary as enlisting Jeremy Paxman as a conciliator for Acas. Warner, though, has been relatively measured in his latest observations (we’ll have to scrap the Scargill comparisons soon). But he is clearly not entirely happy with his employers.

“We’re here to win,” he said on Thursday, “and if Cricket Australia want to try and help us win they wouldn’t be releasing videos like that [describing the players’ preferred type of contract as ‘unbalanced and unsustainable’]. The timing is disappointing.”

There are precedents for this sort of disgruntlement during an ICC tournament. In 1999, England were led by Alec Stewart (not a man who immediately invites the Scargill comparison). Just before the advent of central contracts the England and Wales Cricket Board were slow to produce the contracts for their players in that World Cup. There were numerous disagreements, which included some about the appropriate bonus payments (these would prove an irrelevance since England memorably left the tournament before the World Cup anthem, sung by Dave Stewart, was released).

The dispute must have hampered England’s preparations, but there were other factors for their spectacularly poor performances beginning with the simple fact that they were not very good and there were some strange selections.

In 2016, throughout the World T20 tournament in India, the West Indies were in a fierce dispute with their board but this seemed to do them no harm at all. Darren Sammy, their captain, somehow exploited the situation to unite and galvanise his players, who went on to win a thrilling final against England in Kolkata. This was masterful leadership (Sammy also harnessed the dismissive comments of the odd commentator to good effect as well).

So conflict with the board can work both ways and its impact can be easily exaggerated. Perhaps the weather plays a greater part. Certainly there are some Australians, who have seen their side achieve nothing more than a No Result in their first two group matches, who think so.

On that topic I have two simple questions. Why play any floodlit games in this tournament? And why not let the day games go on into the evening, using those floodlights if necessary, when rain has interrupted? Every effort should be made to get a result in the longest possible game. So much potential playing time is wasted either in the morning of rain-affected floodlit matches or in the evening when there has been a 10.30am start. Please don’t let the explanation be television.

READ MORE: Surrey plan £50m Oval redevelopment to make cricket ground biggest in country

READ MORE: Lions must battle against ‘next Dan Carter’ when they face Crusaders

Provided the weather behaves on Saturday Australia can at least console themselves that this is their quarter-final and Steve Smith has already made that positive observation. A victory guarantees Australia a semi-final slot in the rainforest that is leafy Edgbaston on 15 June, which would leave Warner with plenty of time to pop down to the Walkabout for an orange juice.

England will not bothered by what Warner has been saying or where he intends to take some refreshment while in Birmingham. They will, however, be concerned about his batting in this format. He is ranked second in the world (after AB de Villiers) for a reason. He has matured as a batsman, calculating risks better without ever losing that streak that terrifies bowlers: the yearning to tear them apart. For England his may be the most coveted Australian wicket with Smith a close second. Warner has evolved rather like the mighty Ricky Ponting; from unreliable larrikin to becoming the heartbeat of the side.

Edgbaston should witness a red-blooded contest since the Australia attack is likely to have more pace than any other in the tournament with Mitchell Starc, Pat Cummins touching 90mph and Josh Hazlewood not far behind. Assuming Jason Roy plays he won’t have much thinking time, which may not be a bad thing.

Both sides have their wrist-spinners, who have been selected for one game so far. Adil Rashid excelled against New Zealand in Cardiff and is expected to play unless the pitch is damp and the clouds are set in for the entire day. Likewise, Australia must be inclined to play Adam Zampa if only because the folklore has it that the Poms are useless against leggies (though I’m not sure this applies so much now).

Whoever plays it should be a thriller, hopefully a dry, 100-over thriller. And in the current climate, who dares predict the outcome?