England will stuff the aussies

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by deep-point

Actually, the last time we won was '87, but as I was too young to remember that either I won't hold it against you. I would agree with your point though.

Yes I stand corrected, gatting would be pleased, yea I had forgot ;- http://www.334notout.com/ashes/reports/report62.htm the story.

[Rachael]

Of course.. it wasn't the team in India 3-4 years ago that was the best of recent vitage.. but the one that toured Pakistan and Sri Lanka in 2000-2001.

The team that ended those two series read Atherton (class apart from anyone we have now, since replaced by the as yet unproven Strauss), Tresco (still there, no better), Hussain (sadly missing now, and missed much as Steve Waugh is missed in the Aussie side... but covered by Butcher who is playing well), Thorpe (great then, now our only truly great, proven batsman), Stewart (stacks better than Jones with the gloves, stacks better than Jones with the bat), Vaughan (class already evident, playing better then than he is now), White (fantastic 3rd bowler consistently able to get controlled reverse swing at 90+ mph, considerably better bowler than his successor, more sensible but less destructive batsman than his successor), Giles (still there in the 2nd all-rounder role, but only following a major injury from which he's had to make a long climb back), Croft (retired, a better spinner than any 2nd spinner now in contention, a better frontline test bowler than the likes of Anderson and Jones who now contest that spot, and a decent Test bat), Caddick (surplanted following injury, replaced by Hoggard... who is devastating when conditions suit.. but no match for his predecessor when they do not) and Gough (jured, forced out / retired, replaced by Harmison, who is prone to going AWOL in the early sessions of Tests, good at wasting the new ball by failing to make the batsmen play and (being inexperienced and limited in his repetoire) yet to fully convince on all surfaces in the way that his predecessor always did.. but devastating when conditions suit and the radar is working OK).

I'd back the side that played against Sri Lanka at Columbo from 15-19th March 2001 to beat the current side virtually every time.. but the more significant point is that the 2001 side was packed with folk who really were either at their peak or past their peak... and the current side is just starting to get to grips with what the game is all about.

My contention a year ago was that England wouldn't have really made it until guys like Trescothick and Jones are mere squad players who cannot get a game.. and until we get to the point where an all-rounder is a bonus we appreciate rather than a necessity: we're ALMOST at that point.. but I, for one, would anticipate the last few steps to real credibility being a lot harder than the ones we have already taken: I stil reckon Jones is 2 years away from being a worthy gloveman, Flintoff is 2 years off the finished article, Giles is 2 years short of his best, Strauss and Bell (forget Key) need 2-3 years experience, Thorpe has 2-3 more years as our best bat and the seam bowlers ALL needs 2-3 years experience to really start convincing in their current roles.

[Ernest]

Rachael intesting post, Atherton, I agree better than anything we have now, in fact the Atherton Stewart opening partnership was world class.
Strauss is unproven, but you get feelings about certain players, and Strauss is one of them, as for Trescothick, he is becoming to hit and miss, like Flintoff at Test level, he needs to show some patiance before he starts hitting out, he needs to go back in time.Butcher and Thorpe, the backbone of the top order, and Key a decent understudy.
I am glad to here you giving Stewart the credit he deserves, he was by a mile better than Jones with both bat and ball, even at the age of 40.
White is a strange choice for praise, I remember him saying on Ceefax, he thought there was room for both him and Flintoff, and he did get in the side, he bowled well, like you say he reached 90mph, got the wickets as well, and then all of a sudden he was gone, his pace in the 70s, no confidence, in a short space of time, he ceased to deserve to be an England player.

Gough was a very good bowler, the problem was, he was in the wrong team at the wrong time, at his best he would fit in nice with this England set up.Caddick had a big fault, well documented, he could bowl devastating spells, but this was not the norm, at least in the first innings of a match.
like Anderson after him, he could bowl very ordinary, and then take a batch of wickets, but he was to hit and miss.

The question is, can we beat the Aussies, I think you underestimate the likes of Strauss, Flintoff and Harmison, they are match winners, all can produce spells of devastating cricket, and with the likes of Butcher and Thorpe to steady the batting, and Flintoff(finished artical or not)and Giles can both bowl with accuracy and control.we have the makings of a very good, if not great team.

I agree when you say one or two of our players need another year or two, to reach thier best, but I see the contest this way.

We have a team of rising stars, who in 2005, will be playing Australia, maybe looking for that bit extra in thier bowling.

[Rachael]

What really IS in England's favour is the order of the next two Ashes contests: homes first, then away. If we had to play the Aussies away next summer I reckon we'd get completely trounced. Playing here we should at least make a contest of it: depends what instructions the groundsmen are given.

Maybe by 2006/7 we'll be ready to contest a series on Australian soil.. but if they carry on producing very true, batsmen friendly wickets with pace and boucnce... that's a bit ask: I reckon India wil win on Aussie pitches long before we do.

[Ernest]

You have got to have faith in your bowlers and prepare pitches for them to bowl on, some maybe tempted to produce dead pitches to ensure at least a draw, I hope not.

There have been one or two decent cricket wickets this year, a bit for everyone.

You could be right over India, but it would be a great phycological advantage to England, if we beat them well on our pitches.

[deep-point]

I disagree Rachael.

Although Atherton had good figures for the Pakistan series, he was coming to the end of his career and was hampered by a worsening back condition. Strauss has had as good a start to his test career as any.

Trescothick was, and is, a good player so it makes no difference if he is "no better". Hussain was in the middle of his worst run of form (average 23 vs Pak, 22.66 vs SRL). Hick played 10 test innings on those tours and scored 126 runs. Vaughan only played 1 test on those two tours. Stewart averaged in the low 20s in tests.

Across the two tours White averaged about 40 with the ball. Salisbury played all 3 tests in Pakistan and took 1-193. In SL, Giles averaged 44.14 with the ball and under 4 with the bat. Caddick took 3 wickets at 94 in Pakistan. The only players who consistenly performed throughout that winter were Gough and Thorpe.

You suggest that we should forget Key. Why? This summer he scored a double ton and a matchwinning 93 not out. In my opinion Hoggard is more reliable than Caddick, more likely to perform, or at least not lose his head, when the pressure is on.

And I would rather have a good young team making leaps and bounds than an aging team which is crying out to be broken up.....

[Big Merv]

In all seriousness, I hope England are a better side. No one like to see a one sided game. Especially in Tests. Sounds like the next Ashes series could be very competitive.

[NZBeth]

England have been in brilliant form and I have enjoyed watching their cricket. Although they haven't had the chance to play the top teams it will surely be the next test to see how they fare against tough opposition. I am looking forward to seeing England advance to the next round and come up against a more solid team. Also, their New Year tour to SA should be interesting especially after the recent collapse of the Saffie side.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Big Merv

In all seriousness, I hope England are a better side. No one like to see a one sided game. Especially in Tests. Sounds like the next Ashes series could be very competitive.

No there is no fun in one sided series, it will be competative, good to watch, if that is the case,cricket is the winner.

[Beny]

Stand up to him Merv!!


We cant let the English think they can win.