PHOTO: Composite image of the back pages of the British media after England retained the Ashes, August 6 2013England retained the Ashes in underwhelming fashion at Old Trafford, but the British press has found reason for the hosts to savour the achievement.
We looks at what cricket writers form some of the country's national dailies have been saying.
England superiority over Australia rare so savour three series wins in a row
The definite precedent was the three Ashes series that England won in the mid-1950s. Then, as now, England triumphed twice at home and once in Australia.
This history tells us that England have seldom, if ever, utterly demolished Australia - not as Australia overwhelmed England after the two world wars and again in the two decades from 1989, with the glorious exception of 2005.
So leaking over the line when the umpires called off the game on Monday afternoon may not have been the greatest climax, but England supporters cannot be choosers. Any Ashes victory has to be celebrated because Australia, simply, have been the best country at cricket through the ages - the only country to have won more than half of their Test matches.
England retain the Ashes, Australia frustrated after putting hosts on the rack
After 14 of the scheduled 25 days that constitute this series, England have achieved their primary objective of retaining the Ashes but if England felt at all that this warranted exuberant celebration in Manchester, then they might have needed a rethink: a quiet reflective beer maybe rather than champagne and nightclub Jäger Bombs.
Before the rain returned shortly after lunch to put paid to the match, Australia had England on the rack, struggling for survival and from an England viewpoint it was not pretty.
England and their supporters will take it, no doubt, just as they were happy to celebrate the rain that put paid to any Australia hopes on that last day at The Oval eight years ago. No other sport does rain quite like cricket. But if the Ashes are lost for Australia, the series most certainly is not yet done.
Australia have avoided the whitewash about which there was far too much premature talk but Michael Clarke might well rue his decision to play scant regard to the weather forecast
More to the point, they will regret that they were unable to finish off the England innings by taking the last three wickets on the fourth morning at a time when, because of the gloom-laden forecast, they needed to make them follow on.
Maybe, under the old-school guidance of Darren Lehmann, they will be able to shrug shoulders at their Manchester misfortune, share a fraternal beer or two, and then redouble efforts. It may just be, however, that the chance has gone, the moment missed.
Don’t let one messy Test cloud the big issue
It was, everybody agreed, an unsatisfactory way to retain the Ashes. Off-on, on-off, the match decided as much by Manchester’s old friends, stratocumulus, cumulus and altostratus as the more familiar Cook, Clarke or Bell.
It was 4.39pm when the end was announced, the abandonment of play meaning that the Ashes would remain in England, for another five months at least. There was a spirited cheer from the few hardy, sodden souls remaining, and a temporary postponement of the beery game of call and response between the two sets of fans nearest the dressing rooms, but it was a sorry scene, truth be told.
No playing apparatus, no players, not even an umpire was visible as one of the greatest sporting rivalries drew to its premature close.
Graham Woodward, stadium announcer for the ECB, made the call, and the electronic scoreboard confirmed the news. It was over. In the most inadequate way imaginable, but over nevertheless.
Don’t let the weather fool you. The Ashes have been retained in the minimum time possible, equalling the briefest contested series of the post-war era. The urn was available on July 10 and is back in English hands on August 5. In real playing time, that amounts to 14 days — five at Trent Bridge, four at Lord’s, five here. Australia have won it quicker since 1945, but not England. However miserable this last day, that achievement is a genuine one.
Yes, Australia were devilishly unlucky here, and England came up short in three of the four innings played. Yet this is a series, not a single match. England have spent most of the summer on top and we will never know if Australia would have closed this game out
This was no way to retain the Ashes, but the truth is Australia did not do enough to reclaim them either. Manchester rained, but not on their parade.
The weather made an unlikely victory for Australia impossible
There was not an open-topped bus in sight, partly because it would have been ruinous for the seats given the rain that was teeming over Manchester, partly because it would have been vastly inappropriate.
The celebrations were necessarily muted because the holders escaped with a draw after being thoroughly outplayed by Australia during most of four and a bit days. Had four and a bit been allowed to become five, the tourists may well still be in with a chance of getting their hands on the terracotta urn itself.
The earliest date on which Australia can now recapture the greatest prize is sometime in December, were they to go 3-0 ahead at Perth in the return series later in the year.
But that is to leap much too far into the future.
It should be clear that England have retained the Ashes not because of their performance in the third Test but because they outplayed Australia in large segments of the first two games and won them both. The record shows that not since 1928-29 when Wally Hammond and Percy Chapman were young gods have England secured the Ashes as early as the third Test in a series.
That is an achievement worth mentioning. As Alastair Cook, England’s captain, observed had he been asked if he would take this position 15 playing days ago he would have taken it.
