England have reached a point where the time has come to repay the faith that has been placed in them over a long period. This is a group of players who, largely, have come through the same system and have been together for several years. They have received enormous backing from the management and leadership group, who have consistently shown belief in their ability and character. These players have been England’s best performers over the last few seasons, and there is no issue with that loyalty or continuity. However, the moment has arrived when that trust has to be justified on the field.
They should be wounded by what has happened. They should be hurting. And now, the real question is what sort of fight they have left in them. In many ways, the legacy of the Stokes led “Bazball” era could be shaped by what happens over the next five days. That may sound dramatic, but Test cricket has a habit of defining teams and philosophies through moments like this. If England lose this Test match, then the series is effectively gone, and all the preparation, planning, and long-term focus that has gone into this campaign will have failed to deliver. That preparation has been widely admired, but admiration alone counts for very little if it is not matched by results. Put simply, it would not have gone well.
This makes the upcoming Test an enormous moment for England. However long it lasts, England have to win. There is no escaping that reality. It is no surprise that the selectors are backing the batters who have been the backbone of the side over the last few years. That approach makes sense. There is agreement with the idea that this is not the moment for panic or wholesale change. Personally, no changes would have been made at this stage. That said, pressure inevitably builds unevenly, and there are one or two individuals who will feel it more than others.
Ollie Pope stands out as someone who may be playing for his place over the next couple of Test matches. Zak Crawley did score some runs in the previous game, but he will still be disappointed with the manner of his dismissals. From a selection point of view, the more likely area for change is in the bowling attack, where there may be one alteration. Making these decisions from afar is always difficult, especially without being embedded in the camp or having full insight into the physical and mental condition of the players.
From a purely cricketing perspective, Gus Atkinson, to me, is a better Test match bowler than Josh Tongue. Bowler for bowler, talent for talent, and ability for ability, Atkinson
should be the preferred option. However, Test cricket is not just about skill; it is also about mental freshness. If Atkinson is carrying some mental fatigue and the management feel that a change is necessary, then bringing in Tongue would be understandable. Ultimately, the key is whether Atkinson is mentally right, and that is something only those on the inside can truly assess.
Another significant question revolves around Shoaib Bashir. If there is spin on offer and if conditions suggest that spin will play a meaningful role, then Bashir has to play. If that decision means Will Jacks misses out and England lose some batting depth at number eight, then that is simply how it has to be. The issue with Jacks is clear: he is in the side primarily for his batting. You cannot carry someone at number eight mainly for their runs. The bulk of the batting responsibility has to lie with the top seven, who are the specialists.
In the previous Test, Jacks was the right selection, particularly given his contribution with the bat. But if the pitch is expected to turn and spin is likely to be a factor, then England must pick who they believe is their leading spinner. That decision has to be driven entirely by conditions. If the surface is not expected to offer much for spin, then Jacks remains a valid option. Once again, this is a call that depends on a clear reading of the pitch and conditions.
At present, England’s bowling attack also lacks leadership. The absence of Mark Wood is a huge loss in that regard. His pace, experience, and presence cannot be easily replaced. That places even greater responsibility on Jofra Archer. It is time for him to deliver in this series. To be fair, he has bowled well so far. However, the key moments in Test matches are where your best bowler needs to stand up and take control. For England, Archer is that bowler. He needs to guide the attack and help put the team in strong positions when it matters most.
When it comes to preparing for matches like these, I believe preparation should be individually driven, because every player feels ready in different ways. Some players will prefer to spend long hours in the nets, facing or bowling lots of balls, while others may feel they gain more by doing less. There is no single right or wrong approach.
The key is that pre-match training should allow for these individual preferences. In a team environment, this can sometimes be difficult, as squads often want to train together to build unity and morale. Ultimately, a balance has to be struck between collective team preparation and giving individuals the freedom to prepare in the way that best suits them.
Man for man, and talent for talent, England are capable of winning this Test match. There is no doubt about that. The issue in the last game was not ability, but mentality. This group has been supported and backed consistently. Now, they have to respond by coming out and fighting. That response will define them.
Looking at Australia, there are expected changes. Pat Cummins is set to return, and it would be a surprise if Nathan Lyon does not come back into the side as well. The main area of debate surrounds Usman Khawaja. The stance remains unchanged: if Khawaja plays, he should open the batting. He is an opening batter by trade, and Test cricket is about specialisation. Players should perform in the roles they know best. There has been some talk of him batting at number five, but that does not make sense here. Travis Head is a better number five than an opener, and he should be moved back to that position if Khawaja is selected.
Australia’s other concerns are relatively minor. They will need to avoid any slackness and ensure they adapt well to the conditions. Adelaide will be different from Brisbane and Perth, with lower bounce and extreme heat. The boundaries are short square, which has significant implications for bowling tactics. England, in particular, have bowled too short and too wide. In Adelaide, that approach could be heavily punished, with short balls disappearing for fours and sixes.
Both sides, but especially England, will need to pitch the ball up more and attack the stumps. The longer straight boundaries encourage fuller bowling and hitting down the ground. Australia will certainly be alert to England’s recent bowling lengths and will look to exploit any mistakes. Despite being 2–0 up and close to another Ashes success, Australia are unlikely to be overconfident, but it is something they will still need to manage internally.
Ultimately, everything comes back to England. These are five massive days. They have been trusted, supported, and believed in. Now they must show what they are made of.
