Spectacle wise,absolutely. Standard wise, yep somewhere up there. Only asterix being that England didn't beat Australia once in that series with McGrath playing. That doesn't necessarily change it being the best series of all time, just playing devil's advocate. I know you only beat who gets put out in front of you.Anyone who doesn't answer 2005 Ashes is wrong ftr
I really like that series, as well as the '99 series as well with Waugh's 199 and Lara's 153*, though the goodness might only be confined to one test >_>Frank Worrell Trophy in 1995.
Tbf, England dominated at Manchester and should've won.Spectacle wise,absolutely. Standard wise, yep somewhere up there. Only asterix being that England didn't beat Australia once in that series with McGrath playing. That doesn't necessarily change it being the best series of all time, just playing devil's advocate. I know you only beat who gets put out in front of you.
I thought we were exclusiveMy favourite series ever is the 2010-11 Ashes. I know every inch of it. I have 2 books on it despite only owning five cricket books.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and the beholder in this case was a mostly nocturnal and academically inactive student who posted on a dozen different cricket sites
Yeah.There have been some dynamite 2 test series in the last 5 years or so haven't there? Ind in NZ 2014, Aus in SA 2011, NZ in Eng 2015, NZ in Aus 2011/12.
Edit: A lot of NZ in there, good old "2 test NZ"
That's a bit of a myth perpetuated by media who love to glorify that Ashes series even more. Australia struggled plenty to beat India. They got destroyed in 98 (albeit at the end of a gruelling summer of non-stop tests so they were exhausted), were beaten in 2001, almost beaten in 03/04 (ravaged by injury, yes but still), and although they won in 04 in India, it was hardly a cakewalk.The 2005 Ashes- It was the first time in about a decade that someone had really stood up to the Australian juggernaut.
Yeah and NZ got robbed in the days before DRS in the deciding test in 2001/2 at PerthThat's a bit of a myth perpetuated by media who love to glorify that Ashes series even more. Australia struggled plenty to beat India. They got destroyed in 98 (albeit at the end of a gruelling summer of non-stop tests so they were exhausted), were beaten in 2001, almost beaten in 03/04 (ravaged by injury, yes but still), and although they won in 04 in India, it was hardly a cakewalk.
Yeh, look, fair enough, but...That's a bit of a myth perpetuated by media who love to glorify that Ashes series even more. Australia struggled plenty to beat India. They got destroyed in 98 (albeit at the end of a gruelling summer of non-stop tests so they were exhausted), were beaten in 2001, almost beaten in 03/04 (ravaged by injury, yes but still), and although they won in 04 in India, it was hardly a cakewalk.
2/1 India's way is hardly "destroyed" especially in Indian conditions, although India's wins in the first two tests were fairly comprehensive.They got destroyed in 98 (albeit at the end of a gruelling summer of non-stop tests so they were exhausted)
Once again, 2/1 in India. But yeh, fair point.were beaten in 2001
Yeh, we won those.almost beaten in 03/04 (ravaged by injury, yes but still), and although they won in 04 in India, it was hardly a cakewalk