Pietersen Rebuts Australia Claim Flintoff Won The Ashes Single Handed..>

[Ernest]

Well Pietersen has come out fighting, Australia reckon Flintoff won the Ashes single handed, Pietersen reckons different,

Fighting talk.

Originally Posted by Pietersen

Every single bloke in that Ashes-winning team did a fantastic job," he insisted, before turning the argument on its head. "If it wasn't for Shane Warne in the Australian team, we would have won 4-1.

With a record of 11 Test wins and one dominant draw since last September, the Australians have already started ramping up their prospects.

Aside from Matthew Hayden's suggestion that Flintoff "carries" the team, we have heard Warne claiming that England like to be underdogs and Ricky Ponting suggesting that the recovery mission is on course.

Originally Posted by cricinfo

Pietersen's counter-blast was well-timed, as the last few weeks have seen an upsurge in sniping from Down Under

Link

Is Hayden right - Did Flintoff win the Ashes single handed, or is Mat Hayden ???

[Quagmire]

Well there are a lot of things that happened in the ashes that could have made it go either way, It was a great series and i personally believe if Flintoff was not there the out come would have been different, but also i believe that if McGrath didnt get injured it would have been different. England out played Australia in the series and that is it, there is no other reason. Things might be different in Australia or they could be the same.

[Ernest]

For all the talk on all sides at this early stage no one knows, A lot depends on the next series, like will Flintoff be fit, will Warne be playing, and what we don't know would it make any difference, because the next series is different.Look how Hayden has played since the Ashes, if he plays like that in Australia, or if all England players are fit - to many ifs and buts yet to crystal ball gaze.

Must admit I am looking forward to it.

[greg]

All the talk came from Australia before last years ashes and they were sent packing with their tails between their legs.Let them shout their mouths off and we will see next winter what happens when the action starts.

[Vrock]

In taking of what KP to literal terms. IF England had lost Freddie for last years Ashes, and Australia had lost Shane Warne. Do you think we would have had a simliar result or totally different?

Stuart MacGill would have played, I would hazard a guess that he would have taken as many wickets as Warne did in some innings, but gone for runs and been wicketless in others. That is sometimes the nature with MacGill.

For the loss of Freddie, we would have seen probably Chris Tremlett come in to play. And to be honest I have no idea how he would have done, we would have had a weaker bowling line up on paper and the batting order would have suffered.

And replacements could have had a magnificent series, but for England to lose Flintoff makes things much more complicate than Australia losing Warne.

[Mongoose]

Originally Posted by Ernest

Is Hayden right - Did Flintoff win the Ashes single handed, or is Mat Hayden ???

All i know for certain is that Matthew Hayden didn't win the Ashes single handedly!

[Collyisamackem]

Originally Posted by Vrock

Stuart MacGill would have played, I would hazard a guess that he would have taken as many wickets as Warne did in some innings, but gone for runs and been wicketless in others. That is sometimes the nature with MacGill.

Good thing you said "some innings" there, because IMO there is no way MacGill would have taken 40 wickets in that series. Remember that during that series, in the tour match against Essex, Alistair Cook and co took him for 128 runs off 24 overs.

[south beds mikey]

This is ground I've covered before. Flintoff is crucial for us but so is Warne for them. At the end of the day IMO the 2 biggest turning points in the series happened in the space of 1 hour in Birmingham last summer. The injury to McGrath and the ridiculous decision to insert England.

[Ernest]

The shock tactics of the England batsmen in that match put the Aussies on the back foot, and so much was the momentum, I doubt McGrath or anyone else could have done a thing to stop that assault on the Aussie bowling.

The toss might have made a difference, but only might - who knows had Ponting batted, Aussie might have been 90-4 at lunch - who knows?.

Also in the context of this thread, the other matches came into play. Did Flintoff win the Ashes single handed like has been mooted?.

A question I did not ask, but I don't think England would have won the Ashes without Flintoff, could be wrong - but I doubt it.

[Vrock]

Originally Posted by Ernest

I don't think England would have won the Ashes without Flintoff, could be wrong - but I doubt it.

Could England have won the Ashes without Simon Jones taking all those wickets in the middle three tests?

There are plenty of match turning contributions that were made during the series from each player, Flintoff just happened to make more of them than any other England player.