*Official* Road to the 2010/11 Ashes

[TumTum]

Swann will be treated here like how he got slaughtered at Cardiff.

 

[Sir Alex]

Pakistan were without Gul weren't they due to injury?

He could be useful in England with Asif,wouldn't surprise me if they skittled both the Aussies and England for less than 200 at least once this summer as they are quality bowlers who will exploit the conditions.

Yes, it doesn't change my point though.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Yes, it doesn't change my point though.

No it doesn't but he would have improved them a lot.They have a decent attack if those three stay fit but not in the same class as S.A. who have the best one in the world.

 

[Sir Alex]

This is (yet again, I might add) an example of where looking back at stats/scorecards years after the fact misses so much. For example, the 'rapidly improving' Ponting was dropped for Lehmann after the 3rd Test in Adelaide after trying to hit his way into form. Additionally, Langer was one bad knock away from being dropped himself before his big ton in Adelaide. Quick Cricinfo check shows he was averaging mid-20's in Tests before that knock.

The rest is a matter of opinion and I usually hate doing player-by-player but in my view, at the time;

Taylor >>>>>> Watto (obv)
Slater = Katich (seriously, look at how many 80's and 90's they've got between them! In terms of not scoring tons, the they were separated at birth)
Ponting >>>>>>>>>>>>> Langer circa '98
Huss > M Waugh
Clarke < S Waugh
Norf >> Lehmann/Ponting circa '98/'99 (sorry Boof)
Haddin > Heals (overall, Haddin >>> Heals but Healy was in good touch then)

Overall, even if you rate M Waugh above Huss, it's at least even and I tend to think the current line-up has the edge having, y'know, actually watched the series. Either way, even if they were worse, it's a bloody tough line-up to throw them down at. No matter what, Swan won't be getting any cheap wickets in Australia.

I disagree with North > Ponting/Lehmann and Huss/Waugh comparison. Stats in that decade is not exactly comparable to stats in this decade (Australians having to face Pakistani/WI/ pacers at their best etc etc and pitches being far from benign etc). Also the side looks better than the sum of it's parts back then as compared to now. With such a lineup even inferior to that they pummelled England in the preceding season's ashes (in 97).

 

[flibbertyjibber]

I disagree with North > Ponting/Lehmann and Huss/Waugh comparison. Stats in that decade is not exactly comparable to stats in this decade (Australians having to face Pakistani/WI/ pacers at their best etc etc and pitches being far from benign etc). Also the side looks better than the sum of it's parts back then as compared to now. With such a lineup even inferior to that they pummelled England in the preceding season's ashes (in 97).

Agreed,that Aussie side had an aura and not just the wonderful pair of McGrath and Warne,you knew the batting would punish you too and do it in style at the same time.The current side has faults,they have collapsed far more than any Aussie side used to in recent times and at times have been blown away.People go in against them now feeling they have a chance of knocking them over cheaply,it may not happen but i never ever thought we could get the Aussies out cheaply in the late 90's as they were that good.

 

[Spark]

Richmond Tigers

That's a bit harsh...

Nickelback

...but that's just too far man, too far.

 

[Top_Cat]

I disagree with North > Ponting/Lehmann and Huss/Waugh comparison. Stats in that decade is not exactly comparable to stats in this decade (Australians having to face Pakistani/WI/ pacers at their best etc etc and pitches being far from benign etc). Also the side looks better than the sum of it's parts back then as compared to now. With such a lineup even inferior to that they pummelled England in the preceding season's ashes (in 97).

Inferior? Who was OZ's best bat (by miles) in '97? Matt Elliott. Who was missing come the next Ashes series?

Exactly.

 

[Burgey]

Yes, it doesn't change my point though.

SA yes, India - meh.

Zaheer's on his last legs and had two good years - a slower, left handed Lee, while Sharma's been a disappointment, frankly, of late. I hope he proves more than a flash in the pan. Sreesanth? Could be good, but appears to have issues between the ears.

In fact, it's not just an appearance

 

[Sir Alex]

Inferior? Who was OZ's best bat (by miles) in '97? Matt Elliott. Who was missing come the next Ashes series?

Exactly.

And why didn't he make the lineup in 98?

 

[Sir Alex]

SA yes, India - meh.

Zaheer's on his last legs and had two good years - a slower, left handed Lee, while Sharma's been a disappointment, frankly, of late. I hope he proves more than a flash in the pan. Sreesanth? Could be good, but appears to have issues between the ears.

In fact, it's not just an appearance

Not my point.

Anyway I believe Zaheer Khan has in him another 2 good years. Ishant has had the misfortune of playing most of his recent cricket on subcontinental pitches and tonloads of ODIs and T20s which has added nothing to his confidence. Sreesanth has issues but he is still capable of turning it on in tests as demonstrated by his out-of-the-blue matchwinning effort against SL. Screw our administrators who can't see past the next T20 tournament and accordingly does their selections.

 

[Top_Cat]

And why didn't he make the lineup in 98?

You mean you don't know? The way you speak of that time in Australian cricket history, I assumed you'd seen every Test.

 

[Sir Alex]

You mean you don't know? The way you speak of that time in Australian cricket history, I assumed you'd seen every Test.

Not my problem. I never said or pretended I am an expert in Australian cricket. I am sorry if I sounded so.

My point is Elliott did not make the Ashes squad in 98 and had a torrid season preceding that. I don't think there is damning evidence for considering Elliott as an "undroppable" in 98 Ashes series.

 

[Top_Cat]

Not my problem. I never said or pretended I am an expert in Australian cricket.

So you say. Then you go on to say....

My point is Elliott did not make the Ashes squad in 98 and had a torrid season preceding that. I don't think there is damning evidence for considering Elliott as an "undroppable" in 98 Ashes series.

.....which would tend to suggest that you know for sure the reasons he was dropped were form-related.

The problem is that they weren't; despite an average series against the Saffies, he was injured (knee flared up from his collision in the middle of the SCG with Mark Waugh a year earlier), not dropped. Slater came back into the side, cemented his spot in Pakistan and left Herb on the sidelines waiting for Taylor to retire so he could get a go which he did after exactly that happened.

The above is the very definition of pretending you're an expert on Australian cricket.

 

[Sir Alex]

So you say. Then you go on to say....



.....which would tend to suggest that you know for sure the reasons he was dropped were form-related.

The problem is that they weren't; despite an average series against the Saffies, he was injured (knee flared up from his collision in the middle of the SCG with Mark Waugh a year earlier), not dropped. Slater came back into the side, cemented his spot in Pakistan and left Herb on the sidelines waiting for Taylor to retire so he could get a go which he did after exactly that happened.

The above is the very definition of pretending you're an expert on Australian cricket.

I didn't say he was "dropped" from the Ashes squad. Please don't put words in my mouth. But merely saying his career record prior (and post) to that, showed his Ashes 97 was more of an abberation. I don't think he had a real case to be considered to be a pivotal difference between the lineup of 97 and 98-99 anyways.

 

[Top_Cat]

There you go again, making a judgement on what happened based purely on the numbers. Un. Believable.

I give up.

 

[Pothas]

Things Worse than England

 

[Jayzamann]

What a pretentious film.

 

[Furball]

Not my point.

Anyway I believe Zaheer Khan has in him another 2 good years. Ishant has had the misfortune of playing most of his recent cricket on subcontinental pitches and tonloads of ODIs and T20s which has added nothing to his confidence. Sreesanth has issues but he is still capable of turning it on in tests as demonstrated by his out-of-the-blue matchwinning effort against SL. Screw our administrators who can't see past the next T20 tournament and accordingly does their selections.

That's not an excuse for an Indian bowler, sorry.

If Ishant can't take wickets on his home pitches (you know, the pitches that he's grown up on and played all his formative cricket on) then he's bowling pus.

 

[Sir Alex]

That's not an excuse for an Indian bowler, sorry.

If Ishant can't take wickets on his home pitches (you know, the pitches that he's grown up on and played all his formative cricket on) then he's bowling pus.

Subcontinental isn't just indian pitches. Also pitches vary even within india. His record in India is decent btw. His test record isn't a shocker (FFS he's just 21!) and he has a better average than Stuart Broad. His ODI and T20 failures have given the impression he's has been dire altogether which is not the case.

 

[Nate]

Haha, and just when I thought Pasag/In Burges were ripping it up...