Ron Solly Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Australia well & truly won the Ashes back 5 - 0 against England and the last match in under 3 days. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDolfelin Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 It's our sense of fair play, Ron, after the previous series. Either that or something else. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussiebrfan Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 It's our sense of fair play, Ron, after the previous series. Either that or something else. Can't bat, can't bowl! Broken hearts and broken bats (literally) Or its what happens when the weather lets you play an uninterrupted game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonBradley Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 You are a typical Australian; NO SPORTSMANSHIP whatsoever and then GLOAT over a defeated competitor.! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Solly Posted January 5, 2014 Author Share Posted January 5, 2014 You are a typical Australian; NO SPORTSMANSHIP whatsoever and then GLOAT over a defeated competitor.! Not gloating Don, just advising of the results. Ben Stokes looks the part for future English teams. I prefer any game to be close irrespective of who wins. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordon s Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Come on Don, we'd be doing the same if the result was reversed…:-) Nothing to do with sportsmanship, just the pleasure of winding up the opposition. Anyway, about time the Ozzies won something.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussiebrfan Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 You are a typical Australian; NO SPORTSMANSHIP whatsoever and then GLOAT over a defeated competitor.! At least no Australian player took a leak on the ground!!! Enjoying a victory is not BAD SPORTMANSHIP or GLOATING. Theres no need to shout by the way. As Gordon said you absolutely do the same when you beat us, thats why winning the Ashes is such an epic moment, its not like any other sporting victory. Coming up against the old enemy and crushing them is extra sweet. PS. The result was 5 tests to nil, thats embarrassing not competition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwealleans Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Once the euphoria has worn off, I suspect that this series hasn't really told the Australians anything. In the same way as England won the summer series because of Ian Bell, they've got away with a few dodgy starts this winter because of Haddin, who I hope has been named Man of the Series. They aren't as good as 5-0 suggests, nor are England that bad. The 3-0 in the summer was equally misleading. Personally I'd rather we beat a good side playing well or lost to a side who played better than losing as we have done here to a fairly average side with one or two players at the top of their game and our own side in a collective mental slump. Australia play South Africa next. That will tell them how good they really are and if they do well good luck to them. My own opinion is that they only have three or four really top class players. England may have got to the end of the lifespan of the current coaching/leadership team in the way Australia did at the start of our summer and I'm sure that will be looked at when they get home. Andy Flower is enough of a realist to know if the time has come to stand down and some of the senior players need to take a hard look at themselves as well. For me the loss of Swann - not this winter, but when he had his first elbow operation and stopped being the real force he had been up to then - was the start of the downturn for this side and there is no sign of a replacement for him. Whether Prior comes back in the summer - Bairstow isn't the finished article yet - and Pietersen gets motivated again - and who else stands up and makes a case for selection - all remain to be seen. I think the schedule also has to be looked at as a lot of our players looked as if they'd rather be anywhere else a lot of the time. If they've lost the motivation then it doesn't matter how good they are. We all know these things go in cycles and it's taken Australia a long time to get over losing the core of the great side they had in the early part of this century. If i were them, though, I'd be looking hard at the ACB's fixation with the Big Bash and wondering how many 5 day Test players that will produce when the leading lights of this side move on. Edit - forgot to say well done Darren Lehmann. A top bloke, great servant for Yorkshire when he was here and deserves just as much credit for this revival as anyone who was out on the field. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bilbo Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 I seem to recall that before the series started the British Press !! were telling us it was going to be a whitewash in Englands favour . How wrong they were again !!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussiebrfan Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Anyone know where Beefy is hiding??? Didnt he boastfully predict 5-0 your way! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mow Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 The leading bowler retires mid series, one of the leading batsmen is depressed, stressed and returns home. Were these signs of a deeper problem for the English Test set up? The back to back Test series, with back to back Test Matches isn't a great way to organise things. However, Australia have deserved to win the Ashes back. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussiebrfan Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Once the euphoria has worn off, I suspect that this series hasn't really told the Australians anything. In the same way as England won the summer series because of Ian Bell, they've got away with a few dodgy starts this winter because of Haddin, who I hope has been named Man of the Series. They aren't as good as 5-0 suggests, nor are England that bad. The 3-0 in the summer was equally misleading. Personally I'd rather we beat a good side playing well or lost to a side who played better than losing as we have done here to a fairly average side with one or two players at the top of their game and our own side in a collective mental slump. Australia play South Africa next. That will tell them how good they really are and if they do well good luck to them. My own opinion is that they only have three or four really top class players. England may have got to the end of the lifespan of the current coaching/leadership team in the way Australia did at the start of our summer and I'm sure that will be looked at when they get home. Andy Flower is enough of a realist to know if the time has come to stand down and some of the senior players need to take a hard look at themselves as well. For me the loss of Swann - not this winter, but when he had his first elbow operation and stopped being the real force he had been up to then - was the start of the downturn for this side and there is no sign of a replacement for him. Whether Prior comes back in the summer - Bairstow isn't the finished article yet - and Pietersen gets motivated again - and who else stands up and makes a case for selection - all remain to be seen. I think the schedule also has to be looked at as a lot of our players looked as if they'd rather be anywhere else a lot of the time. If they've lost the motivation then it doesn't matter how good they are. We all know these things go in cycles and it's taken Australia a long time to get over losing the core of the great side they had in the early part of this century. If i were them, though, I'd be looking hard at the ACB's fixation with the Big Bash and wondering how many 5 day Test players that will produce when the leading lights of this side move on. Edit - forgot to say well done Darren Lehmann. A top bloke, great servant for Yorkshire when he was here and deserves just as much credit for this revival as anyone who was out on the field. You seem to have discounted the influence/re-emergence of a fantastic pace attack. No one can deny that Mitchell Johnson was absolutely devastating and no English batsmen seemed to have any answers for sheer pace and accuracy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PhilH Posted January 5, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 5, 2014 Well done to the Aussies, superior in every department. As noted above it was good to see a genuine pace bowler in Mitch Johnson get his reward for bowling at absolute blistering pace, so pleasing to see in these days of boring line and length. So, again, well done Australia, you deserved it. Good job it's only cricket...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwealleans Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 You seem to have discounted the influence/re-emergence of a fantastic pace attack. No one can deny that Mitchell Johnson was absolutely devastating and no English batsmen seemed to have any answers for sheer pace and accuracy. Agreed. You have to take 20 wickets to win matches. But if it wasn't for Haddin the pacemen wouldn't have had the runs to bowl at and the time to rest. Ask Anderson and Broad how that feels. I think I'm right in saying that this is the first time Harris has stayed fit for more than 3 consecutive tests? I think you'd also have to look back at the last Ashes series in Australia and note that the only time Johnson bowled to his undoubted potential he blew England away twice. That time, he only did it in one match. It's only 9 months ago he wasn't even picked for the touring party - whatever he's done or found then it's clearly worked and I hope David Saker is trying to find some. If he carries on in this vein then cricket generally will be better for it and it's to be applauded. More knowledgeable pundits that I have noted, though, that essentially the same England batting lineup did much better against Morkel, Steyn and Philander the last time we played SA, so it's not just a question of pace, there's something more fundamental wrong. You have to wonder what the results here and over there might have been if Mickey Arthur had still been in charge of Australia? If Johnson carries on like this - and Harris and Siddle stay fit - Australia will be a much more potent side. I have to say, though, that I still think 'Steve Harmison' WRT Johnson and it will take several more matches of performance at this level before he shakes off the legacy of a lot of below par games in the past. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussiebrfan Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Agreed. You have to take 20 wickets to win matches. But if it wasn't for Haddin the pacemen wouldn't have had the runs to bowl at and the time to rest. Ask Anderson and Broad how that feels. I think I'm right in saying that this is the first time Harris has stayed fit for more than 3 consecutive tests? I think you'd also have to look back at the last Ashes series in Australia and note that the only time Johnson bowled to his undoubted potential he blew England away twice. That time, he only did it in one match. It's only 9 months ago he wasn't even picked for the touring party - whatever he's done or found then it's clearly worked and I hope David Saker is trying to find some. If he carries on in this vein then cricket generally will be better for it and it's to be applauded. More knowledgeable pundits that I have noted, though, that essentially the same England batting lineup did much better against Morkel, Steyn and Philander the last time we played SA, so it's not just a question of pace, there's something more fundamental wrong. You have to wonder what the results here and over there might have been if Mickey Arthur had still been in charge of Australia? If Johnson carries on like this - and Harris and Siddle stay fit - Australia will be a much more potent side. I have to say, though, that I still think 'Steve Harmison' WRT Johnson and it will take several more matches of performance at this level before he shakes off the legacy of a lot of below par games in the past. I agree with what you say, however I would add Smith and Rogers into the mix as well. There centuries at crucial times were gamechangers as the top order didnt exactly set the world on fire. Harris remaining fit is a great asset, in fact its the first time in I dont know how many years that the team lineup remained unchanged throughout a series. The idea of rotation happily seems to have gone out with Arthur. Obviously England didnt perform as they would have wished to but you have to wonder how the coming and going of players unsettled the dressing room. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwealleans Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 We'll have to disagree on Smith and Rogers - I don't rate either of them. Rogers (I saw him bat at Durham in the summer for the first time) is a limited player who makes the most of what he has. He put me in mind of Kepler Wessels. Dreadful to watch but as effective as he can be. I think really good bowling will find him out. Not that that reduces my admiration for what he does achieve. Smith I think is mentally fragile and in a struggling side I think he'll flounder. South Africa will be a much better indicator of how good both of them are. To go back to an earlier point, though, Rogers is nearly 37 and has a grounding in Shield and County cricket. Why, this late in his career, isn't there anyone ten or fifteen years younger pushing hard for his place? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
10800 Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Firstly, well done Australia, just a shame the matches weren't closer and more competitive. England had no answer to Johnson when they were batting and no answer to Haddin's counter-attacks when they were bowling. No doubt there will be many and lengthy inquiries into the whole series when the dust (sorry that should be ashes) has settled. Secondly, remember the first day of the first test at Brisbane when England actually had a good day in the field? Nearly everyone thought this was the shape of things to come, except Geoff Boycott who commented something like "I'll reserve judgement until I've seen England bat". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussiebrfan Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Hi Jonathan I'm happy to agree to disagree with you, much more civilised and gentlemanly than being abused. Good points about the upcoming S African tour, we'll just have to see if we've been getting ahead of ourselves. Much easier for so-so players to do well confidence wise in a winning team. Also good question about Rogers, one for the selectors. Regards Glenn. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonny777 Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 The Australian 1st innings in the final test illustrated just what is so wrong with English cricket. They had Australia at 97 for 5 after a great spell of accurate, good length bowling - so then what did they do? Revert to type; wide, short pitched bowling which England have believed is what "real" fast bowlers must bowl in order to get wickets because they think it shows machismo. Result? Australia recovered to 225 for 5 and all out for 326. It is almost as if the West Indies side of 35 years ago is the only goal that England are ever going to have as a bowling line-up. The irony of that approach is that Holding, Garner, Roberts and Marshall did not bowl short and wide ad infinitum. They actually were very accurate, and could get the ball to move away from the bat enough to find an edge, or add the occasional yorker to devastating effect. Watch the current South Africa opening bowlers. They know that consistent fast and full pitched bowling is what get results, not banging it in half way down the pitch. Sorry, rant over. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZiderHead Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Once the euphoria has worn off, I suspect that this series hasn't really told the Australians anything. etc. I have to say your analysis is spot on, I completely agree. England have been in decline since being thrashed in Pakistan winter 2012, followed by SA at home that summer. Winning in India was surprising and welcome, but remember that India aren't really that bothered about test cricket any more - its all about IPL. The NZ tour was an embarrassment which almost everyone seemed to ignore and this summer's Ashes was a contest between 2 pretty average sides - both batted poorly and England just about edged it by bowling tighter on pitches prepared for our bowlers and our Duke ball. I have the ultimate respect for Beefy as a player, but as a pundit very little. His 10-0 prediction this summer was just ridiculous, even a 5-0 was dreamland. I keep hearing "England went into this series as favourites" - by whom? The players' mums? I predicted 3-1 before the tour, 4-0 after the warmup matches and 5-0 after the first test. It doesn't give me any pleasure to have been proved right, and because I don't bet against my own teams I couldn't even make a few ££s out of it! That said, very well done Australia, that was great all-round performance and a well earned whitewash. Standout players for me over the 10 tests - Ryan Harris and Stuart Broad. Both seemed completely unfazed by their team's woes and just got on with the job. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussiebrfan Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 England just about edged it by bowling tighter on pitches prepared for our bowlers and our Duke ball. With this I completely agree and of course the weather. PS. What is a typical Australian??? My name isnt Bruce, my wifes name isnt Sheila, I dont wear a hat with corks hanging off it and I havnt got Kangaroos in the backyard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-UnitMad Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Seeing as The Ashes was started off in the first place to celebrate "the Death of English Cricket", it seems that is still highly appropriate given this whitewash.. England's 3-0 win here was deceptive - it was "only just" in all cases. Australia's victories this time have been emphatic, as much due to England's incompetence as their own ability. In every Aussie 1st Innings they were down at less than 100 for 5 wickets, & England threw it away.... As a night worker I get to hear most of the TMS commentaries far more when the Tests are Down Under than at home, but this time I just gave up. Glad I didn't spend thousands of pounds to go & actually watch such a humiliation.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold stovepipe Posted January 5, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 5, 2014 Anyone know where Beefy is hiding??? Didnt he boastfully predict 5-0 your way! It's a tradition. Pidge used to say 5-0 to Aus every series, for a wind up. He would have been wrong in 4 out of the last 6 series. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold stovepipe Posted January 5, 2014 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 5, 2014 The Australian 1st innings in the final test illustrated just what is so wrong with English cricket. They had Australia at 97 for 5 after a great spell of accurate, good length bowling - so then what did they do? Revert to type; wide, short pitched bowling which England have believed is what "real" fast bowlers must bowl in order to get wickets because they think it shows machismo. Result? Australia recovered to 225 for 5 and all out for 326. I've lost count of the times I've heard on commentary that England are bowling too short. Not just in this series but throughout the careers of Anderson and Broad and co. Then after a lunch or tea break they come back and bowl the proper length. How is it that they have to be told over and over again? I don't think there is much nous in the England team out it the middle. Aus bowling has been exemplary, and is the real substantial difference in quality of the sides in this series IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 You are all wrong. This wasn't cricket at all, but something else. Real test cricket requires that two of the five days there is no play due to torrential rain, and everyone has a convivial time in the pav. over several jugs of warm beer; and two of the remaining three the going is soft, and the usual result is a draw. The only stressed out guy in the true game is the groundsman, whose beautifully prepared sward ends up looking like a riverside meadow on which cattle have grazed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.