England's place in world cricket

[butchering lee]

Originally Posted by Rachael

1)selfless team players [ ] rarely get huge acclaim despite routinely putting in far superior performances [] This is nothing new, and is not unique to soccer. ...2) So some fan and media hopes ARE pinned on individuals... but I'm not convinced that this nonsense has that much impact with many professional teams in any sport...3)The barmy army and team were well and truly on different wavelengths!

1) it is not unique to Enland either but, again imo, it is absent from the best sides.
2) i guess this is where we differ - i am not convinced either, but i do have strong feelings that it does have an impact.
3) for the sake of English cricket i can only say i hope this becomes consistently true but...well, see point 2.

[Milo]

Originally Posted by butchering lee

I am not quibbling about if they are good - they are simply not as good as they should be imo.

This pretty much goes for all of the major cricket nations with the exception of Sri Lanka and Australia in my opinion. It can certainly be said for South Africa, India, Pakistan and West Indies (with New Zealand open for debate).

[butchering lee]

Originally Posted by Milo

This pretty much goes for all of the major cricket nations with the exception of Sri Lanka and Australia in my opinion. It can certainly be said for South Africa, India, Pakistan and West Indies (with New Zealand open for debate).

I agree and that is what i meant when i said "not unique to England" in my previous post. Is it a coincidence then that Oz are No1 and SL in the acendancy?

In fact now you've brought it up - India have Tendulkar, SA have Kallis, Pakistan have/had Shoaib and WI had Lara (now to some extent Chanders) and (apart from Tendulkar - as far as i know) there have been a few dressing-room mumurs about all of them.

[Milo]

Sorry, I must have missed it reading through the thread quickly. I suppose there are many reasons for teams underachieving. Lack of desire, financial security, pressures from media and fans, lack of bottle, lack of team spirit etc. Most of these probably apply to some players in all teams. Michael Johnson always talks during major athletics tournaments that British athletes should only be given funding (in our case from Lottery money) when they achieve certain levels (ie medals/or global finals). In this way, their need for reward would be fueled by their level of success. It is no coincidence that US athletes are relatively poor until they make world level. Having said this, Australian cricketers are very well paid and they continue to believe in the desire of the 'baggy green'.

I've always had issues with the MBE sweep that accompanied the 2005 Ashes (especially given them to Bell, Collingwood etc), but we were no good at one day cricket before that so it can't have had too much impact on that level of poor achievement (I'm not sure it's underacheivement because we really aren't that good at LOI cricket). Unfortunately, in a world with so many idiots in it, we cannot stop people becoming heroes (and therefore able to gain huge levels of fame and finance). With no real need to succeed (other than individual desire, which is often lacking) I think the England team (and others, especially Pakistan and West Indies who often now just like to entertain or bowl as fast as they can) are pretty much doomed. Make players earn their contracts, newspaper columns - remove mandatory press conferences which make players seem important - and make them attain their popularity.

[butchering lee]

Originally Posted by Milo

Unfortunately, in a world with so many idiots in it, we cannot stop people becoming heroes

thanks milo.

and while we're talking of idiots and it's relevant to the post.

just copied this off live coverage i was watcching:

14.1Harbhajan Singh to Pietersen, OUT, that's curtains for England! A rank full-toss and Pietersen clobbered it, but straight back at the bowler. It was self-preservation first and foremost, but a great take in front of his face, and Pietersen is gone!

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Rachael

This is nothing new, and is not unique to soccer. Stewart, Botham, Gough and Flintoff have all been over-hyped in the media in games in which they have been indifferent[... ]whereas a better quality performance from (say) Crawley or Caddick has been the cue for utter castigation!
No Rachael these players were no over-hyped.

Stewart was the best opening partner for Atherton, was forced down the order to enable him to keep wicket.
Botham was a player of note - like it or not he "Bothams Ashes" did happen, and that is recorded in history, no argument about that IMO.
Gough I am not sure - but Rachael he opened with Caddick, and had it not been for Gough - there would have been hardly any wickets until England opponents second innnings, because that was when caddick was at his most destructive.
Flintoff again in 2005 will go down in history as the player who won the ashes for England - you can't take that fact away from him - and he would have been a major player in Australia 2006, only for injury.
As for Crawley he was dropped for doing nothing wrong, he got injured and never got his place back - but the difference between Crawley and Caddick in comparison with Botham and Flintoff - neither won a series for England.
Thorpe did, as did Strauss and G O Jones who had major partnerships with Flintoff at crucial times, and I would say that both Flintoff and Botham has suffered as much castigation as Caddick or Crawley ever did- in fact some were waiting for the time either would fail.

So some fan and media hopes ARE pinned on individuals[...] the fact that England managed without much help from Pietersen in winning the recent ODI series in Australia and then against India this summer... and the success the team have had without Flintoff in many games...suggests that the dressingroom is in sounder shape than you suggest.

Originally Posted by Rachael

te clear that England's top order feared a middle order collapse: many in the media looked to Flintoff to pull England out of holes... but the high probability of Flintoff failing put HUGE pressure on the likes of Butcher, Hussain and Thorpe! The barmy army and team were well and truly on different wavelengths!

Rachael form 2004 Flintoff did stop many England collapses, like I said before he had match saving partnerships with Thorpe, Strauss GO Jones - and even Giles, O'h I forget Butcher.

Flintoff failed in 2002.03 and might have put pressure on the players you mentions - but look at England top/middle order since the Ashes in 2005?, poor is an understatement.

The barmy army discarded Flintoff after Pakistan in 2005 - along with the rest of his "fair-weather" supporters, that's why Pietersen has come under so much pressure - to emulate what Flintoff did in 2004/05, and that in turn has put pressure on Flintoff as well as his injuries.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Stewart, Botham, Gough and Flintoff have all been over-hyped in the media in games in which they have been indifferent[... ]whereas a better quality performance from (say) Crawley or Caddick has been the cue for utter castigation!

I wasn't suggesting that Botham and co never warranted hype... but all players have better days and worse days... and the likes of Gough and Stewart DID escape criticism of many indifferent performances where the likes of Caddick and Crawley tended to attract abuse even when they played quite well!

It's more true of soccer (e.g. the Neville Brothers) than of cricket... but the tendency is clear enough.

[butchering lee]

Originally Posted by Ernest

Flintoff again in 2005 will go down in history as the player who won the ashes for England - you can't take that fact away from him - and he would have been a major player in Australia 2006, only for injury..

i cannot begin to imagine how demorailising that must be for:

Vaughan - who led superbly.
S Jones - who was the surprise package - that really unsettled australia
KP - who, ironically for me, was involved in two of 3/4 crucial moments. the first being his batting in the first test, he showed what could be done with application ... and something clicked in the team.
Even Harmy, Hoggy and Gilo would in all probability feel slightly put out at your summary of the ashes.

but there you go

Originally Posted by Ernest

So some fan and media hopes ARE pinned on individuals[...] the fact that England managed without much help from Pietersen in winning the recent ODI series in Australia and then against India this summer... and the success the team have had without Flintoff in many games...suggests that the dressingroom is in sounder shape than you suggest.

it seems a slight contradiction - but as this part seems to deal directly with my assertions i'll just say that i don't think the results you refer to have any reflection of the dressing-room whatsoever. what it does reflect is the strength of the bench...which goes back to what i was saying. this is nothing to do with England's potential - they simply should be doing better. That greg is satisfied with a home defeat to India, 5-0 ashes is indicative (despite a decent series - performancewise - against Pakistan).

[greg]

Originally Posted by butchering lee

That greg is satisfied with a home defeat to India, 5-0 ashes is indicative (despite a decent series - performancewise - against Pakistan).

I am not satisfied with losing but i know we couldn't do much else with so many players missing.

The fact that in the last few years we have basically rebuilt the side that won us the ashes series means we are going to have slip ups along the way but to moan after 1 home series defeat in 6 years would be a little pathetic.

I am not arrogant enough to think we should beat everyone out of sight but once more we see any chance to knock England is taken at the earliest opportunity by others around the world.

[butchering lee]

Originally Posted by greg

moan...pathetic...arrogant...

you've somewhat missed the point - but sort of add to it too, albeit unintentionally .