THE JIMMY ANDERSON COLUMN: How England can hit back at the Gabba - the team I'd pick, the plans the bowlers need, my advice for Joe Root and why snubbed pink-ball warm-up match would have been so helpful

You simply cannot let positions like the one England found themselves in last weekend - a hundred runs ahead with nine wickets in the tank - slip away against Australia.

You’ve really got to put your foot on the throat when you get into that position and the contrast in the way the two teams batted shows where England went wrong.

A lot of the post-match talk has been about finding different ways of playing, that it is not only about attacking, but then Travis Head goes out and shows you that you can attack with a match-winning, counter-attacking hundred.

The problem for England’s middle order was that they didn’t approach things in the same way. Graham Gooch, who was England’s batting coach on the victorious 2010-11 tour, told us that because the ball bounces in exaggerated fashion when playing at the WACA - a different ground, but a pitch made of the same Perth soil - the dangerous shots were the 45-degree angled bat shots. So, the back-foot punches and the wide drives.

Head was a perfect example of someone who didn’t get sucked into playing them: he didn't drive anything unless it was right under his nose, unless it was really full, like a long half-volley.

In contrast, the three England guys in the middle order, Ollie Pope, Joe Root and Harry Brook drove at both length balls and back-of-the-length balls. It was just the wrong shot option.

The two areas you try to attack are square of the wicket and straight down the ground, but England were trying to hit that gap at extra cover and they'll be frustrated with that.

On a pitch like that, you've really got to wait for the ball to come to you. Yes, Head was moving around a bit and looked ungainly at times, but he was playing the ball really late, and accessing the high percentage area options.

If I were in that England dressing room, I'd be saying that I loved the intent, but questioning the execution: are you trying to play the right shot to that sort of ball? Are you looking to score in the right area?

It was the game-changing period of the Test, losing those quick wickets in the middle period of the second day.

From a batting point of view, England are not going to go into their shell, that is for sure, but I'd love to see Joe Root be Joe Root. Sometimes, I feel like he gets caught up with everyone else, when it would be better for him to build an innings, get through that first 20, 30 balls. Take a breath, be himself and then everyone else around him can do their thing.

For all that, Australia were still needing to get the highest score in the Test match, there was still bounce in that wicket, still enough there for the bowlers. If they'd have bowled as well as they did in the first innings, then they might have had a chance.

But once England went short at Head, they became quite predictable, he could set himself to play everything off the back foot. The extreme pace worked an absolute treat in the first innings, and it was not just dismissing Australia for 132. England really made things uncomfortable.

But the second innings exposed the fact that sometimes you need to change either the pace of the bowling or the speed of play, and when someone like Head’s going like that, you need to have a Plan C, D, and E, not just A and B.

Head was unpredictable in his movement, and in return as a bowler, you've got to try to be a little bit unpredictable as well. Not just go short all the time.

It's so hard when someone gets going in that kind of situation. You end up walking from the field, asking: ‘Wow, what has just happened?’ But you need to take a moment between balls, be really clear on what you want to bowl, even try to bowl as you would at the death in a T20 match: try the odd yorker, the odd slower ball, just something to become a little bit less predictable.

The paces of all England’s bowlers were down a bit in the second innings, but I wasn’t too bothered about such a dip. During the first innings, they were filled with adrenaline as it was the first Test of a huge series.

With a relatively low score on the board, you know you've got to bowl quick. Second time, they didn't have a lot of rest, as England's second innings lasted just 34.4 overs, only 11 balls longer than their first.

What I would be focusing on, heading to the second Test next week, is how the fast bowling plans worked on the first day of the series.

England have built up to this series wanting to hit Australia with pace, and it worked perfectly. They left a lot of marks on Australia and started finding cracks in that batting order. A lot of their batters were taking blows on the body - Marnus Labuschagne on the elbow, Nathan Lyon to his ribs, Cameron Green got hit in the helmet, Steve Smith was dismissed cheaply.

Despite the result, that really aggressive performance will leave scars on Australia. So, over the next nine days, Brendon McCullum and Ben Stokes will be focusing on the positives and reinforcing that England need to be more ruthless if they ever get into that position of dominance again.

One slight worry for me is that they were in those positions of strength in the summer against India, and let them off the hook.

I also know from personal experience what it is like to be dominating a Test match in Australia, only for it to be flipped on its head in a flash. But England have got better personnel now to be able to deal with this than we had in Adelaide in 2006-07, and the dressing room will be full of strong messaging.

That Adelaide Test - when we racked up 551 for six declared and led by 38 heading into the second innings before collapsing to 129 all out as Shane Warne took hold - was the second Test 19 years ago, and it is so hard to come back from 2-0 down.

England have now got to treat this as a four-Test series. Forget that the first Test happened. Four matches left, and they've got to try to win all of them, starting in Brisbane, so they've got to put absolutely everything into winning there.

From a bowler’s point of view, that means they can’t think about saving energy for the three remaining games. They've got to leave absolutely everything on that field, and just trust that the squad will look after itself. There are other players that can come in for reasons of injury or fatigue.

With this in mind, I'd be tempted to play the same XI in the pink-ball Test at the Gabba. Spin won’t play a massive part. Last time we were there, there was a bit of grass on the pitch, a bit of carry, a bit of seam movement, and Jack Leach struggled.

The fact it is a pink-ball game will help help the seamers too, potentially, and the seamers that played in Perth deserve that chance to go again for their first innings display.

One of my concerns ahead with England opting not to send the Test team to the two-day floodlit fixture in Canberra is that it's really difficult to practise with the pink ball unless you're playing an actual game.

As much as you can net, the lights in the nets are always different - brighter than when you get out in the middle. They tend to be on top of you; in the middle the light is not so strong.

And because of the different phases of play in day-night cricket, unless you’ve been in that situation before, it's really hard to get used to it.

Twilight, for example, is a really difficult period, as the lights turn on and the sun goes down. Darkness too. You can't truly replicate that in the nets.

But England planned this however long ago and they're obviously sticking to their plan.

Would I prefer them to go and get match practice? To be honest, I’d want them to follow their own choices, and I'd be really surprised if some of the batters weren’t given the option to go.

It can work in one of two ways. It could give you some valuable experience in a game situation against a pink ball, or you could nick off in the first five balls and it’s an absolute waste of time.

Equally, this England regime is always keen to keep the main group of players together, staying tight after a loss and regrouping.

From a team morale perspective it’s important that you're sticking together, there for each other, because some guys will be really down after that game.

The players will be talking about the details around the eight-wicket defeat, what went well, what didn’t, not necessarily in a formal way, just having chats around dinner, over a coffee, chewing the fat about how they can move forward - and how they can win the next one.

They've worked hard in the last couple of years building up to this, and after day one, people would have been really happy.

But the nature of being in the position they were, lots of wickets in hand and then losing that same day made it feel like a real sucker punch.

The whole country was invested in it, lots of people had travelled, others were getting up in the night here. Of course, everyone’s frustrated, but there'll be no more frustrated group of people than the England players themselves.

And, having played with most of them for so many years, there will be a huge determination to claw things back.