Ashes thread - England vs Australia * SPOILERS *

Big Kev · 28 Dec 2006 at 13:59

dirtydog said:
I didn't like what I saw yesterday when Hoggard was interviewed by the BBC. His whole attitude and demeanour, to me, was that it was all a bit of a joke and a laugh, and he didn't seem bothered at all Maybe that is the difference between the two sides. The Aussies never accept poor performances or defeats, we shrug and don't care it seems. We being the England team, not the public anyway.

If that is how he feels then he shouldn't be allowed to play for his country and nor should any of his team-mates who feel the same way

I haven't seen the Hoggy interview, but if that was the case, then some people need a right kick up the 'arris, the fans have saved up for years for this trip, sing their hearts out and deserve 100% commitment from the team and let's not forget those of us who have taken days off work (unpaid in my case) to stay up all night to watch it as well.

Mad old tory · 28 Dec 2006 at 14:17

Fred's annoyed me a lot more than Hoggy tbf. Hoggard always has a cheery demeanor but he also always gives his all for England. What's annoyed me about Flintoff is his attitude of denial, he alway's praises Aus which is fair enough because they have been excellent, he never seems to criticize his own teams performance. Now, this may be because he doesn't want to lower morale in the camp, but to me it just smacks of making excuses.

wassap · 28 Dec 2006 at 14:56

Really annoyed me when we won the ashes, how matey we were with the convicts, they just havent been the same with us quite the opposite.

We need to be ruthless winners like them.

Rosbif · 28 Dec 2006 at 15:49

Yeah I know what you mean wohoo. Where is the ruthlessness and desire to win by pushing the limits? I mean really ruthless. Bodyline ruthless. Douglas Jardine would never have praised Australia or put his arm around one of their players after they lost a series. Sadly warriors like him dont exist anymore.

sedm1000 · 28 Dec 2006 at 23:41

wohoo said:
Really annoyed me when we won the ashes, how matey we were with the convicts, they just havent been the same with us quite the opposite.

We need to be ruthless winners like them.

You can still be matey and ruthless. You just need talent. There is a way to play the game, and I`d rather it was matey after the match than not.

Jardine was a bit of a dolt (even at the time). Interesting chap, but thought nothing of the Australians as a people. Wasn`t a big fan of other "natives" either. You can still be a good bloke and win. Look at Shane Warne...

sedm1000 · 28 Dec 2006 at 23:45

dirtydog said:
I didn't like what I saw yesterday when Hoggard was interviewed by the BBC. His whole attitude and demeanour, to me, was that it was all a bit of a joke and a laugh, and he didn't seem bothered at all Maybe that is the difference between the two sides. The Aussies never accept poor performances or defeats, we shrug and don't care it seems. We being the England team, not the public anyway.

If that is how he feels then he shouldn't be allowed to play for his country and nor should any of his team-mates who feel the same way

When you have been thoroughly slaughtered over 4 tests there isn`t really a "way" to act. You can go train twice as hard for the next one, and sound as positive as possible, but it wont change what`s inside your head when you step out in the next test. Outwardly the simplest repsonse is to maintain a unified front and deal with recriminations when you get home. Worse than getting thumped is to fall apart in front of the opposition. That would be inexcusable.

e36Adz · 28 Dec 2006 at 23:55

Im just watching Boycotts interview on bbc2 after the highlights, LOL hes just coming straight out with it, absolutely slating them.

Boycott speaking about Harmison...
"2 years ago he was one of the most fearsome one day bowlers in the world and now he doesn't even want to play in the ODI's, hes stupid, he will run back home to watch newcastle utd play"

Psycho Ned · 29 Dec 2006 at 00:01

Boycott & Botham speak more sense than any of those jokers running the England team atm. Harmison is a joke the blokes been bowling crap for 2 years yet we keep picking him is because we've got no one better!

The fact they arnt yes men is the reason they've never been in the England setup I expect.

JAzz · 29 Dec 2006 at 01:10

The last Ashes series hurt a lot of Aussies deep down, great players hunger was suddenly questioned and many pondered whether the great Aussies time had finally come. Well this is their response to what happened in the last series, they have worked their nuts off since that series to get themselves back on track. Ponting in particular was embarrassed and made to feel the heat when he came back to Australia after that loss and embarked on destroying every international team in sight after that. Though he would not be completely forgiven unless he won the Ashes back in style and that is what has happened. The Australian players have been thinking about this series for a long time and their thoughts were always dwelling on this series. They wanted this series more than anything else and their hard work has been rewarded.

Now onto England, after their impressive win against the Aussies last time many thought England's time had come and they were the top dogs in world cricket. They went on tour to Pakistan and India to seal their position as the no.1 side and only got a bit of a battering and came back home. Maybe a little blip but personally I thought people were getting carried away with the hype. I've read that with a full team England would have retained the Ashes but when you consider that last time England only scraped through with the Ashes and they were in the form of their lives and the Aussies were all at sea that prediction is a bit far fetched. I seem to remember England fans praying for rain at the Oval and the two matches England won were by the skin of their teeth. England dominated the series in term of how they played but the matches that were won were very very close. On Australian patch there was gonna be no reverse swing which was the main thing that helped England win the series, Australian bowlers couldn't get it going and the English bowlers couldn't get enough of it! With that out of the equation how would the bowlers do here? Well from what we have seen not very good and I don't think having Trescothick, Vaughan and Jones would have made much of a difference as I always felt the Aussies would win the Ashes back. Maybe the series wouldn't have been as one sided but apart from Vaughan the other two don't have much of record in Aussie conditions.

Yas786 · 29 Dec 2006 at 11:52

e36Adz said:
Im just watching Boycotts interview on bbc2 after the highlights, LOL hes just coming straight out with it, absolutely slating them.

Boycott speaking about Harmison...
"2 years ago he was one of the most fearsome one day bowlers in the world and now he doesn't even want to play in the ODI's, hes stupid, he will run back home to watch newcastle utd play"

Hehe Boycott is brilliant he is, i love listening to his comments...he does praise England but usually slates them because simply they cant seem to win a game and hes the one who actually turned round after last yrs ashes FLUKE win and said he couldnt see England retaining the Ashes when they go down under...looks like his premonition was right. Plus he also likes Pakistan and always praises them so is a decent bloke in my book

.

Jazz said:
I don't think having Trescothick, Vaughan and Jones would have made much of a difference as I always felt the Aussies would win the Ashes back

Which is what i said to a few fervent England fans that i know, having Vaughan, Jones and Tresco wouldnt have made a difference to the results so far...yes they would have been much closer but not by much. England look like pussy cats and the Aussies are lions out there. They really want to punish England for last yrs loss and by the looks of it, they are doing a superb job of it.

Just reading on Cricinfo, seems like the Aussie coach Buchanan is asking England for a decent match at least in this series lol

...i dont blame him or the Aussies...must be getting awfully tiring and boring having to keep beating a bunch of so called England test cricketers day in and day out.
Plus he made an observation that England's wonderboy KP isnt really a team player...if thats true then thats pretty sad and pathetic on KP's side.

http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/ausveng/content/current/story/274329.html

Also that old fool Fletcher says he doesnt regard this as Englands worst defeat...i guess losing by an innings and 99 runs isnt worse that losing to SA by an innings and 92 runs in 2003...the guy is a joke....seriously if England want to compete with the best ie the Aussies and show that they really are the 2nd best team in the world then get rid of this idiot asap. At the moment theres no way in hell that England are number 2 in the world...if anything they should be between Zimbabwe and Bangladesh with the way they are playing at the moment...and Flintoff....the worst English captain in a long time...the captaincy should go to Strauss imho...he did well against Pakistan over the summer and i think he should be given the reins for the last match....who knows they might win it as much a miracle as that sounds lol.

Mad old tory · 29 Dec 2006 at 13:32

Spawn I think you're going a bit far there. Any team playing the Aussies in this series would probably have gotten a wollaping, although we've done a spectcularly good job of it

I think a lot of people are underestimating how much we miss Vaughan's captaincy. Let's look at this match in particular. We win the toss, it's overcast and suited perfectly to Hoggy in particular. Flintoff bottles it though and, obviously mindful of the Aussies building a huge first innings lead again, decides to bat. Also, we had the Aussies at 84/5. Under Vaughan, that would have meant men all round the bat and the quicks bombarding the batsmen left. Instead, Fred brings on Panesar after lunch with a defensive field to Symonds of all people!!!

I've been amazed by how defensive we've been throughout the series. Adeleide is the prime example of this. Final day, we should have been looking to press on and set the Aussies a challenging target in the hope of bowling them out. Instead, we look merely to block and survive and get bowled out cheaply. There were only a few overs left when the Aussies won, if we'd had put on another 30-40 runs even we wouldn't have lost.

Of course the selection decisions have been unbelievable in this series too. Jones should never have toured, he did nothing for Kent after he was dropped, so why does he get his place back? Giles and Panesar is old ground, but Giles probably shouldn't have toured either, we could have had someone like Dalrymple as backup seen as he can bat as well as Giles and surely is as good a bowler.

It does make me wonder how much of an influence Fletcher actually had in the last Ashes. England were so aggressive and never let the Aussies settle in that series, yet this time round we've been so defensive and scared of them. I guess Vaughan must have had more say over decisions than Fred did last time round, but either way I think it's time Fletcher went and my god do i hope Vaughan can stay fit for this summer!!

Big Kev · 29 Dec 2006 at 14:31

I see the old drivel about England thinking they were number 1 in the world has reared it's ugly, boring head again. I've said this many, many, many times that I don't know a single England supporter who thought we were number 1 after regaining the Ashes, it's only in the head of "non England" supporters and extremely tiresome now.

We were beaten in Pakistan, which is no disgrace, then we drew with India, which was a good result, so we were, after beating Australia, justifiably 2nd in the world.

As for the captaincy, Vaughan is an excellent captain and would have made a big difference, especially as Freddie is a novice captain and still learning, although Strauss may have done a little better, Vaughan was needed.

Trescothick's experience would have been a real asset too and Jones would have given us a settled bowling line up, with Monty obviously starting.

As for some people thinking us winning the Ashes was a fluke, what are you on??? This isn't a 90 minute football match, this was a five match series, you can only have so much luck, we played damn well and the Aussies admitted then and still admit as much now that we outplayed them.

Before the Ashes series, we'd travelled to South Africa and beaten them and whitewashed the West Indies and New Zealand, so we weren't in bad form.

We have had some good moments in this series, but not carried it on to finish the Aussies off and paid the price for this inconsistency, but the Aussies were really hurt by losing the Ashes and have put a serious amount of work into winning them back and their desire showed. Remember, this team is probably the best of all time and although half of the team are coming to the end of their careers, they're no mugs and wanted to finish with the Ashes in hand.

platty · 29 Dec 2006 at 16:25

Big Kev said:
As for some people thinking us winning the Ashes was a fluke, what are you on??? This isn't a 90 minute football match, this was a five match series, you can only have so much luck, we played damn well and the Aussies admitted then and still admit as much now that we outplayed them.

Yup Warne Ponting have said many times that England were simply the better team. Without the rain at Old Trafford it would have been 3-1.

Duno where this nonesense about Pietersen is coming from. From what Ive seen is England needed to change the batting order with Tres going and Flintoff coming back. KP said he liked 5 and that fitted in with Fletchers defensive plans of having Bell and Collingwood at 3 & 4. Later on he asked to be moved back to 4. How that doesn't make him a team player god knows and Don't see what Buchanan would know about it. He should get back to finding ways to get his son on more as 12th man.

See Fletcher finally admitted to what everyone else knew from day 1 of the series, his selections were wrong. A proper selection panel needs to be established IMO and overhaul the current system.

Jones should not be seen anywhere near the England team for a good while, Get Davies in as Reads understudy. I'd also drop Plunkett for Broad as hes the better prospect IMO.

Preparations were pathetic, Harmison is a guy who needs games and had some injuries before the series. Only now is he looking in rhythm.

Injuries did cost us a bit. Vaughan and Jones being the main two, Jones who was our 4th choice seamer getting the number of wickets he did was a huge factor last time round.

One slight problem I don't really know the full answer for is Englands negativity at the top of the order. We never put pressure on the opponents anymore at the start of an innings. Thats what Trescothick gave us in both forms of the game. Now we get 2 runs an over and lose multiple wickets for not many runs. I liked Cook at 3 during the summer with Strauss and Tres at the top.
ODI form of the game highlights the opening negativity more IMO. Other countries have Jayasuriya, Sehwag, Gayle, Gilchrist, Thuranga. We get Ian Bell. I'd like sum1 like Mal Loye in ODI who will attack and play aerial shots which are pretty safe in power plays.

Anyway Australia have played very well and completely outplayed us. Time to give a few players a kick up the ****. Sort out selection and future preparations and get ready for the West Indies who come over in the summer.

My team for what its worth.

Strauss
Vaughan (c)
Cook
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff
Read
Broad / Mahmood
Harmison
Panesar
Hoggard

sedm1000 · 29 Dec 2006 at 20:29

platty said:
See Fletcher finally admitted to what everyone else knew from day 1 of the series, his selections were wrong. A proper selection panel needs to be established IMO and overhaul the current system.

Not just picking on this, but there is a whole lot of tosh coming from a lot of angles in the media. People have short memories. It was only ten years ago when the UK press was up in arms about a selection committee that put out sides that the captain wasn`t happy captaining. This calling for heads and usual overhaul crap is part of the reason that England can rarely develop anything like a settled system for generating good sports teams.

With some exceptions, the ex-pro press are more hindrence than help - they should recognise better the pressures and problems of playing this standard of cricket. The slating of Jones, Harmison and now Flintoff has bee really out of order, and contributed undoubtedly to their loss of form. Work things out once the series is over, but dont pick the side apart whilst its still on the field.

platty · 29 Dec 2006 at 21:07

sedm1000 said:
Not just picking on this, but there is a whole lot of tosh coming from a lot of angles in the media. People have short memories. It was only ten years ago when the UK press was up in arms about a selection committee that put out sides that the captain wasn`t happy captaining. This calling for heads and usual overhaul crap is part of the reason that England can rarely develop anything like a settled system for generating good sports teams.

The reason it aint settled is because its a complete mess and does need sorting out ASAP. The selection panel leaves the team selection to Fletcher when the team are on tour which is a joke especially considering Fletcher wanted to give up his selection role as he didn't want to do it. So we have 1 selector who doesn't want to do it picking our team. Then a managemet committee with people like G.Jones on it. It doesn't matter if things have been changed before etc the current situation is a complete mess and needs sorting out.

sedm1000 · 29 Dec 2006 at 23:43

platty said:
The reason it aint settled is because its a complete mess and does need sorting out ASAP. The selection panel leaves the team selection to Fletcher when the team are on tour which is a joke especially considering Fletcher wanted to give up his selection role as he didn't want to do it. So we have 1 selector who doesn't want to do it picking our team. Then a managemet committee with people like G.Jones on it. It doesn't matter if things have been changed before etc the current situation is a complete mess and needs sorting out.

Sources?

This is pretty much the same committee that worked in 2005 and this model worked on tours before.

The reason that the side lost was becasue the Australians had a more talented, motivated and experienced squad to put out. It was clear we would be shoed out there from 6 months ago. The only question was the scale of the defeat. The "no-win" and damage limitation attitude had set in before the squad was picked. To try to assign blame now, and tear apart a structure that has been very successful in turning the English cricket set-up around is madness - yet predictably this is what people want to do.

Mad old tory · 30 Dec 2006 at 00:20

Sedm1000 would you really drop Bell? He's been on great form recently, although I guess someone's gotta go for Vaughan.

platty · 30 Dec 2006 at 00:25

sedm1000 said:
Sources?
This is pretty much the same committee that worked in 2005 and this model worked on tours before.

Yup it did but then G.Jones's place wasn't as disputed as it was now. Don't get me wrong I don't mind the selectors talking to the coach, captain and senior players. Dedicated management committees that have a definite say on team selection isn't on though.

In the past there was also a tour manager that had say on team selection as Gooch mentions in the past paragraph of this article.

http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/ci/content/story/273198.html

Sources for Fletcher not wanting to be selector is The Times:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,4-2510341.html

Also Sky News sports sections quoted an England official saying they might review the selection process and that Duncan Fletcher indicated he didn't want to be part of it.

JAzz · 30 Dec 2006 at 02:50

Big Kev said:
I see the old drivel about England thinking they were number 1 in the world has reared it's ugly, boring head again. I've said this many, many, many times that I don't know a single England supporter who thought we were number 1 after regaining the Ashes, it's only in the head of "non England" supporters and extremely tiresome now.

We were beaten in Pakistan, which is no disgrace, then we drew with India, which was a good result, so we were, after beating Australia, justifiably 2nd in the world.

As for the captaincy, Vaughan is an excellent captain and would have made a big difference, especially as Freddie is a novice captain and still learning, although Strauss may have done a little better, Vaughan was needed.

Trescothick's experience would have been a real asset too and Jones would have given us a settled bowling line up, with Monty obviously starting.

As for some people thinking us winning the Ashes was a fluke, what are you on??? This isn't a 90 minute football match, this was a five match series, you can only have so much luck, we played damn well and the Aussies admitted then and still admit as much now that we outplayed them.

Before the Ashes series, we'd travelled to South Africa and beaten them and whitewashed the West Indies and New Zealand, so we weren't in bad form.

We have had some good moments in this series, but not carried it on to finish the Aussies off and paid the price for this inconsistency, but the Aussies were really hurt by losing the Ashes and have put a serious amount of work into winning them back and their desire showed. Remember, this team is probably the best of all time and although half of the team are coming to the end of their careers, they're no mugs and wanted to finish with the Ashes in hand.

I'd never say England fluked the Ashes last time around, England were worthy winners but what I would say is that it was a one off series and even though England I didn't feel England were a better side. Aussies had imo got complacent and England came up at them all guns blazing and they caved in. Like I said before reverse swing won the Ashes. Not since the days of Waqar and Wasim (I'm sure you will remember those days fondly

) have I seen a team use reverse swing so effectively and the Aussies had never seen anything like it. They knew England had it in their arsenal and it can be countered but they didn't really counter it well at all. In Australia England would have that weapon taken away and imo Simon Jones is a swing bowler and on Aussie pitches I'm not so sure how well he would do.

Vaughan would have definitely improved the side, I don't think there has been much wrong with Flintoff's captaincy but his performances with the bat have been dire and Vaughan was superb last time he toured here. I feel too much is being made of what kind of captain Flintoff is, when your bowlers don't put it in the right area and your batsman get out playing silly shots that doesn't come down the captain imo. Trescothick is unproven away from home in general and even on home soil does not have a century against Australia. With Simon Jones like I said he his mainly a swing bowler, he got a bit of a bashing by the Aussies in the first two matches in England when there was so swing available for him and it would be similar out in Aussie land so again I'm not so sure about him.

sedm1000 · 30 Dec 2006 at 14:14

Mad old tory said:
Sedm1000 would you really drop Bell? He's been on great form recently, although I guess someone's gotta go for Vaughan.

Not until Vaughan`s played 6/7 innings to prove his fitness and form. You`d be better sticking in Brierley with a zimmer at the moment.

Seriously, Bell still hasn`t shifted all the doubts about him. Vaughan seems unlikely to come back and make any real impact at test level now. Bell can score heavily against 2nd tier teams, but is always going to be suspect against the best. Pick him based on his form.

Platty - Thanks. Gooch is talking about when he started in the 70`s though. The last several years of England touring have had the coach largley in charge. You can appreciate Fletcher not wanting to take the extra blame, if the reports are true, but I still think that coach and captain are in the best position to guage which side will work on a particular day. I cant find that it says that other senior players play an official role in selection (other than informal consultation which happens in all set-ups). The last para of the Times article confirms that this had worked well before.

Its not like Jones is fighting for his place by sitting on the committee - which is quite different from twenty years ago having Trueman fighting for the place on any Yorky just because of his accent. Its better to have a situation were the captain and coach agree about the players on the field, rather than have the friction of working with players they are unsure about.