The Ashes... All hype??

[Beny]

Now, the apoligists on this board might not like this but... Well I dont really care.

Over the past 5 years Australia have taken every challenge thrown at them and come through unscathed. Sure there was a little hicup in India during the 2001 series, but we made up for that last year. We've beaten everybody, everywhere. No team has been able to knock Australia off their perch. India in Australia dosent count as we were missing half the team, but otherwise these guys have anhialated every contender to the point where commentators now question whether their dominance is hurting the game.

And now the Pommies think they can reclaim, or even challenge for the Ashes because they've beaten a ragged bunch of the lowest ranked teams in the world. Ohh yes and because they have a bowler who managed to climb to the top of the world rankings when Warne, McGrath and Murali were all out of the game, then he slid down like everybody other than the English expected him to.

Is anybody, other than the media and the English, taking the England threat seriously?? Surely the Tour of India was much harder?

[Milo]

You will only know whether the tour of India was harder after Australia are on the plane home in September (with or without the replica urn).

Hype? Of course. But I remember there being plenty of hype from McDemott (especially from this loud mouth who talked of getting revenge and drawing blood for the years of WI fast bowling), Hughes, Border, Boon, Jones etc when your team went to the Caribbean in 1991 and got played off the park in much of the first four tests and lost the Frank Worrell Trophy puting up only brief moments of fight.

[Beny]

You will only know whether the tour of India was harder after Australia are on the plane home in September (with or without the replica urn).

Ohhh, now see there is the 'sitting on the fence' attitude which is clouding this series. I have no doubt what so ever that the tour of India is the hardest Australia will ever face. England just dont have the team to raise questions...

[Milo]

I've never sat on the fence one bit with this series. I expect Australia to win it quite easily and show their predominance in all areas. I'm just challenging your assessment that the India tour was so testing. It was only important to you Australians because you hadn't managed to win their in 35 years.

If you think the previous tour of India was their biggest test you are well and truly mistaken. A rusty Indian team, missing Tendulkar for the first two tests was a far far difference from the Indian sides they have played in the past. New Zealand put up a better fight in the tour to Australia in 2001/02. The tour of Sri Lanka was a lot more of a test. Australia shone through that series - and showed their prowess - but let's not start hyping up the Indian tour just because Australia happened to win the self proclaimed 'final frontier'.

This series will probably test Australia a lot more than the woeful Indians did last year.

[Ernest]

Well I don't sit on the fence Beny, but your post thread is flawed, who are all these Englishmen who who are talking to England to the point of saying England will win the ashes series except for me, even England veterans don't give England an even chance.

However to counter your point, we have a team good enough, young enough, experienced enough, to win the Ashes series, and Beny come September, the Australian team INMO will be leaving this green and pleasent land, minus the Ashes ERN.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Milo

The tour of Sri Lanka was a lot more of a test.

That's my impression: I was SO exasperated that the other cricket going on in the world at the same time seemed to distract from what I expected to be.. and what turned out to be.. the most interesting series of the past few years. It's hard to credit, loking at the bare scorecards and averages, just how tough that tour was... but I'm pretty sure the Aussies appreciated just how small the margin between a series win and a slip up had been.


In the first innings of the first Test Australia posted a mere 220... then allowed Sri Lanka to build a big lead with an innings of 381... one got a sense that the series was going to be good.

In the 1st innings of the second Test the great Aussie steamroller just imploded: all out for 120. All of a sudden, as the track dried out, batting became easier. Gilchrist took his chance to swipe quick runs... but when he fell the 2nd innings total of 226 was still WAY short of what was needed. Martyn ended up batting for 9 hours in that second innings to salvage a total that could be defended.. and Warne's 5-for only scraped them home with 20-something runs to play with.

To cap it all... at 98 / 5 in the secnond innings of the final test, building ona small 1st innings deficit, Australia looked defeat in the face.. and have to count themselves fortunate that Katich managed a resillient 86 in 6+ hours coming in at no 7.

Not THAT was a tough series. Sadly, for England, I think it focussed minds on playing "proper" cricket... and the side are now tougher for the experience.

[Seamer]

Yes for Australia, that was the toughest and most satisfying series since Australia's series win in the West Indies in 1995. That tour (WI 1995) will go down as our greatest ever series win. It was at that point that Australia's clikb to world dominance began. But to get back to the Hype factor. IN my memory, i have been a test cricket nut for 20 odd years, this Ashes series is the most eagerly awaited tour ever - even more than India 2004. The old enemy, No1 and No2, going head to head with teams packed with quality players (R.Key excepted if selected) - the hype is justified.

[Paoli]

The India series for me, barring the first test, wasn't the most satisfying and inspirational performance I've seen. The 1995 performance was much more satisfying. We were playing a Windies side who nobody predicted were at the end of their reign, with a side filled with nobody who could be called a great of the game at the time, except for Warne, and possibly Steve Waugh, and got up and won 2-1. Inspirationally. We had not won the Frank Worrell trophy in God knows how long. But for me, this was the pinnicle of my days of watching cricket.

I understand that we think the series to India was the best we've seen, but I reckon if we had've clinched it with Funky Miller in 2001, it'd have been a hell of alot better personally. Why? Because the series was the equivalent of the Dutch Total Football. It was, in essence, Total Cricket.

I think Milo's right about his point on what was the hardest tour ever. If we exit England having lost 4-1; then I think we can safely say that it has been a hard tour and that Ern's seemingly wild predictions are correct. More likely, though, Australia will return with the urn, and the Ashes will have been hype. If England can win 2 tests, it'd be an achievement and I think that then the series can be classed as a good one, and living up to the hype. This thread, however, has the ring of several other threads.

Beny and I tend to share an opinion; I think the media hype here in Australia and the hype in England will turn out to be just that by series end. However, I hope that I am corrected.

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Paoli69

If we exit England having lost 4-1; then I think we can safely say that it has been a hard tour and that Ern's seemingly wild predictions are correct.

You see this is with others putting words in my keyboard, I have never said England will win easy, I have always said I believe England can, and are able to beat Australia this time for various reasons, in the main the ageing of some Key Aussie players.
I can't see any hype to be honest, well not on this board at least, I think most members of ALL nationalities believe it is a forgone conclusion the Australia will win the series, and most believe with ease.

Originally Posted by Paoli

This thread, however, has the ring of several other threads.

Yes and that is fair enough, things change, players get injured, Mark Waugh says Warne is not the bowler he was, these topics happen daily, and are up for discussion.

Originally Posted by Paoli

Beny and I tend to share an opinion; I think the media hype here in Australia and the hype in England will turn out to be just that by series end. However, I hope that I am corrected.

Well this is true of all sport including the soccer world cup, there will always be hype tagging along with a major event, and I think this year they don't come more major that the Ashes, when the series is over, then so will be the hype.

[flanflinger]

Originally Posted by Beny

Is anybody, other than the media and the English, taking the England threat seriously?? Surely the Tour of India was much harder?

You are quite right that in Test terms there may be harder tours - India and Sri Lanka... But I find it quite sad that you do not understand the history of this tour. The reason it is so "hyped" up is because of the History. The two old enemies going at each other for the Ashes..

The great players in the past who fought so hard for them, Bradman, Hutton, Lillee, Thompson, Border, Botham, Willis.

It saddens me that you as an Australian don't get the importance of beating the Poms.. However, it does give me some hope. Maybe all the thrashings we have received have steeled our resolove and weakened yours..

In 1985 when won, created that Steel in the Aussie team, Border deciding he was never going to suffer that again, that started the period of Aussie dominance that you take for granted. If that steel is gone, maybe it is the start of a new period of dominance by a resurgent England team?