| Why England don’t have a hope: The Ashes 2005
Australia have dominated the world cricketing scene for years now, brushing aside many of the worlds foremost teams with an effortlessness which has had pundits questioning whether Ricky Ponting’s men are damaging the game. Indeed the naysayers may have a point as many fans will tell you that the expectation and excitement, which usually accompanied a tour overseas or at home to a great cricketing nation such as the West Indies or Pakistan, no longer exists. On the other hand, the pure quality and brilliance of the Australian players such as the destructive Adam Gilchrist or metronomic Glenn McGrath, is reason enough to keep interest in the game.
Recently though, a flare of excitement has been seen in the air over England in expectation of the coming Ashes series which fans and commentators alike are anticipating as the clash which could see Australia toppled from their podium. Most fans are holding short of predicting an England victory, although they’ll happily inform you that there will at least be some competition, in contrast to the mauling they received on the last tour of Australia. Yet is this anticipation, even as constrained as it may be, really justified? Or is this simply another series for the rampant Aussie machine?
On paper the teams are lopsided with Australia’s winning formula blatantly obvious. In the batting department Australia has 5 batsmen in the LG ICC top 20 whilst England has only three. Further to that, of the afore mentioned Australia’s Ricky Ponting, Damian Martyn and Adam Gilchrist are all ranked in the top10 whilst England has only Marcus Trescothick at number 9. This is not including the fact that Mathew Hayden is only recently recovering from a lapse of form which saw him drop out of the top 5. All of those in the Australian team have averages above the 50.00 mark which places them not only as some of the best batsmen in the world today but also puts them in Illustrious company of some of the greatest players ever to live. On the other hand England’s top ranked player averages only 45- a good average but not in the same league as his Australian counterparts. Indeed only Andrew Strauss averages higher than 50 and he has been painted as a looming threat to Australia, although he cannot do the job alone. Can the likes of Captain Michael Vaughan and demolition man Andrew Flintoff assist? Vaughn had a fantastic series against Australia when he toured in 2001 and he suggested that his liking for some of the best bowlers in the world has not waned as he plastered them in the champion’s trophy. However, even if these players do make the required lift then England will only be asking questions, rather than substantially challenging Australia.
What about the bowling I hear the Harmison fans urging…. Well to be honest, I’d rather face Steve Harmison at the moment than a rampaging Shoaib Aktar or Muttiah Muralitharan. Harmison’s brief stint at the top of the world bowler rankings raised some hope for English fans however the rest of the world realized quickly how misguided that faith was. Harmison’s ability to generate pace and bounce was unfortunately offset by his tendency to forget that where the bowl bounces has a degree of effect. Even with the pace and bounce though, he was not the world’s best bowler. Indeed he only achieved that summit due to the untimely injuries or bans applied to Shane Warne, Muralitharan and McGrath. Now, having been shown up, Harmison languishes outside the top 10 and is still falling. Only Mathew Hoggard maintains a presence for the English team inside the top 10 and even then only at number 9, just above Australia’s Jason Gillespie and below Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath.
Undoubtedly the biggest difference in the teams is one that cannot be proven by statistics. Australia has redefined the way the game is played. Teams now try to imitate the revolutionary approach that has followed the introduction of Adam Gilchrist into the number 7 batting spot. Gilly is not only a reliable and even excellent keeper but also a destructive batsmen who has the ability to shape a game as he has often done, saving Australia’s hide when needed and more amazingly, doing so at great pace and with awesome power. No team in the world can match that, although many try. Australia’s revolution of the game does not end there though. Both the adaptability of their batting and the constant reliability of their bowling, which has evolved along the lines of teamwork, applying pressure rather than bowling with convoluted plans and abstract aims have turned the Aussies into a finely tuned machine. No doubt that Australia’s bowlers still have tactics but the main aims are always the same, ‘keep it tight’.
So based on this we must ask the question, why all the hype? Sure this is the Ashes. Sure this is no.1 versus no.2 in the world. However the teams are still so far apart that predictions of anything other than an Aussie avalanche are long shots at best. Perhaps I’m wrong and perhaps England are hiding something up their sleeve, but on face value this is going to be nothing less than another predictable Aussie tour. Sorry to disappoint you folks. Perhaps 2007 is your year?
__________________
It's hard enough to remember my opinions, without remembering my reasons for them!
Nietzsche
Last edited by Beny : 12-06-2005 at 11:09 AM.
| 
12-06-2005, 10:58 AM
Linear Mode
