Battle of words, contrasting ideologies, dizzying stakes - the Ashes feels like it again

The sport of cricket has lived on for centuries and has, over the years, been home to several magnificent and cut-throat rivalries. The Ashes, when indulging in that discussion, is very much front and centre.

So, even before a ball had been bowled, Australia coming down to England was a big thing. The fact that England had been thumped 4-0 the last time these sides met, or that they looked clueless on that tour, did not really matter.

England have brazenly adopted this brave, new world under Ben Stokes and Brendon McCullum. Almost all of their players have bought into this philosophy and while it is, of course, not foolproof, it has given both the players and the fans more than enough to get behind.

Australia, on the other hand, are the reigning World Test Championship (WTC) winners, having outwitted India at the Oval earlier in June. This is, according to many back home, one of the best-assembled Aussie Test sides in the past decade, and while they do not have a lot of overseas success to back that notion up, they do have a tangible trophy to show.

So, even if you forget the sort of feuds the two sides have embroiled themselves in historically, there is a very recent narrative that both teams would want to alter. England want to prove that this new style, which has been questioned at every juncture, can work against the gold standard in Test cricket. Australia, meanwhile, want to illustrate that they can win anywhere and everywhere.

The first Ashes Test in Birmingham was a perfect case in point. Australia and England went at it for five days. They battled rain, numerous twists and turns, traded turns to engage in an inevitable war of words before Australia edged past the hosts.

The match ebbed and flowed throughout, with both teams, at times, guilty of being twitchier than usual. This is particularly pertinent considering this Ashes series was supposed to be closely-fought, involving two sides that have made no bones about how they are going to play. That both teams have their respective peaks to scale and paradigms to shape, only makes it better.

This is, after all, the Ashes. Fiery, feisty and a whole lot of fun.

Australia and England played out an Ashes classic at Edgbaston

England, to their credit, have seemingly taken it upon themselves to maintain the fun quotient, studded with funky declarations, funkier field placements and an adherence to entertain, even if it, like it did at Edgbaston, comes at the cost of a vital Ashes victory.

Australia, being the win-at-all-costs machine that they are, prioritized getting over the line, even if it meant being slightly more defensive. And as absurd as it might sound, both teams might have actually gotten what they wanted from Edgbaston – England, the embracing of a high-risk game in a higher-stakes battle and Australia, a victory to set the ball rolling.

Oh, and among all of that, there was plenty of chatter – between the players participating and those watching. It all began when Ollie Robinson gave Usman Khawaja a rather verbose send-off in the first innings and then decided to bring up what past Australian cricketers had done, casting himself as the pantomime villain in Australia.

Past Aussie cricketers – the likes of Matthew Hayden, Michael Clarke and Ricky Ponting were never going to not respond, each coming up with replies that were an equal blend of tetchiness and tenor. Now that that curtain has been raised, expect that banter (read sledging) to continue, until the Ashes winds up.

Robinson and James Anderson also wrote columns post the game, which, if you had not guessed already, did not go down well with some (read Australians).

Funnily enough, Robinson quipped that McCullum, despite a heart-breaking defeat at Edgbaston, said that it felt England had won, for the way they had played their cricket.

There might be some truth to it, and looking at the larger picture might have been McCullum’s intention. But hey, this is the Ashes and anything and everything remotely related to it, will be blown out of proportion.

That might seem a bit of an overreaction, especially considering England have dared to change the Test game forever. But this is how the Ashes are. This is how it is supposed to be, with every single move being scrutinized like it is the last.

It has always been high-stakes, and it has always been edgy. But if you cast an eye at the previous rendition, played in the backdrop of COVID-19 and amid the partial confinements of bio-bubbles, it felt that England wanted to be anywhere but in Australia, with the Aussies barely breaking into a sweat.

Not anymore. Not this time.

This is exactly where England envisioned themselves to be when the whole Bazball fever gripped the nation. This is exactly the brand of cricket they wanted to play in adversity, and most importantly, this is exactly the panache they want to showcase while playing, irrespective of the result.

If they are able to do it, their brand of cricket or Bazball as it is more commonly known, will have a chapter to itself in Test cricketing folklore (provided it does not have that space already). But if Australia are able to stop this juggernaut, they will once again prove what more than 200 years of Test cricket have taught us – that attrition triumphs over attractiveness of the cricket played.

That is why this particular Ashes series feels and looks the real deal. There will be trampled egos and tarnished reputations. By the time it ends, though, everyone involved, including those watching, would know that both teams have given it a proper rattle, and that they, irrespective of however this Ashes instalment winds up, would have witnessed greatness, one way or the other.