Which is bigger - The Ashes or BGT?

[Line and Length]

Yes i respect australian fan view . Its their choice to choose but from only cricket point of view BGT has surpass ashes .

As Burgey pointed out, BGT has only recently become remotely interesting. The history of the Ashes carries far more prestige, intrigue and passion than BGT can ever hope to achieve.

 

[TheJediBrah]

There's also history and prestige with regard to Australia v England sports in general, not just cricket. The Olympics is often a close-fought affair, Aussies winning Wimbledon, rugby, probably a bunch of other stuff too. Not to mention that they sent us to this beautiful land as convicts and now we and our country are superior in every way. It's interesting history

Whereas the billion+ population of India has had to focus on playing 1 sport in order to become even remotely competitive at it

 

[Coronis]

There's also history and prestige with regard to Australia v England sports in general, not just cricket. The Olympics is often a close-fought affair, Aussies winning Wimbledon, rugby, probably a bunch of other stuff too. Not to mention that they sent us to this beautiful land as convicts and now we and our country are superior in every way. It's interesting history

Whereas the billion+ population of India has had to focus on playing 1 sport in order to become even remotely competitive at it

Is it a coincidence that India’s final Gold medal in field hockey happened a few years before their first World Cup? I think not.

 

[Adders]

The Ashes has been interesting since 1882, in that Australia has consistently dominated it with an occasional English interlude of decency.

Hmmm (checks notes).......

Australian Ashes series wins 34
England Ashes series wins 32

#oooooohsodominant

 

[Burgey]

Aus has also reatined six times via drawn series, England only once. It's comprehensive. Realistically, Aus holds the Ashes about 2/3s to 3/4s of the time and England chimes in with a false dawn in between. Its those false dawns which make them so happy being mediocre for the rest of the time.

Just a low brow outfit.

 

[GIMH]

Aus has also reatined six times via drawn series, England only once. It's comprehensive. Realistically, Aus holds the Ashes about 2/3s to 3/4s of the time and England chimes in with a false dawn in between. Its those false dawns which make them so happy being mediocre for the rest of the time.

Just a low brow outfit.

So when we retain The Ashes we do it by winning. Got it

 

[Adders]

Haha, Burgey craps on about Aussie dominance in the Ashes and then has to resort to the drawn series count in order to tip the scales. Classic.

 

[Adders]

And the only reason Australia have spent significantly longer as the Ashes holders is probably more to do with the fact its 18 months between the series in Eng and Australia but 30 months between the Aus one and in Eng.

 

[GIMH]

And the only reason Australia have spent significantly longer as the Ashes holders is probably more to do with the fact its 18 months between the series in Eng and Australia but 30 months between the Aus one and in Eng.

That’s only a recent thing in fairness. We’ve established now, thanks to Burgey, that the only reason they’ve held it longer is through draws. The all conquering winning mentality nation, taking draws as wins. What an embarrassment

 

[Qlder]

That’s only a recent thing in fairness. We’ve established now, thanks to Burgey, that the only reason they’ve held it longer is through draws. The all conquering winning mentality nation, taking draws as wins. What an embarrassment

Well Australia have won 152 Ashes Tests compared to England's 112, so there is that for having a winning mentality

 

[ataraxia]

Well Australia have won 152 Ashes Tests compared to England's 112, so there is that for having a winning mentality

Wow, really winning dead rubbers when it matters.

 

[Xix2565]

So is this just a way to check who wanks more during the Ashes vs the BGT?

 

[Burgey]

So when we retain The Ashes we do it by winning. Got it

You just don't do it often enough. Like I said, you occasionally fluke it then revert to mediocrity. Australians have a comfortable margin and lead England easily in Ashes history, and of course even moreso as human beings.

 

[Burgey]

So is this just a way to check who wanks more during the Ashes vs the BGT?

I think you've got everyone covered all year round there mate.

 

[Victor Ian]

True. I enjoy being human.

 

[Burgey]

And the only reason Australia have spent significantly longer as the Ashes holders is probably more to do with the fact its 18 months between the series in Eng and Australia but 30 months between the Aus one and in Eng.

Nah it's got more to do with the fact that Enlgand teams are generally shittier.

 

[Qlder]

I just realised England have won only one Ashes series in Australia since 1986/87. The 2010/11 series really was an anomaly in the last 38 years wasn't it lol

 

[Molehill]

I just realised England have won only one Ashes series in Australia since 1986/87. The 2010/11 series really was an anomaly in the last 38 years wasn't it lol

Better to have that anomaly that not at all......which is where Aus is heading for series wins in England. 26 years by the next Ashes when they will clearly have no chance.

 

[Coronis]

Wow, really winning dead rubbers when it matters.

Better than losing dead rubbers surely?

 

[Burgey]

As if there's such a thing as an Ashes dead rubber. smdh wtf is wrong with people thinking that?

It's that mentality which leads to the sort of mediocrity which England has always displayed.

The same weak mentality which has people saying "Oh well, you've got to hand england this" or "Well done England, have to give them credit."

Bullshit.

You give the filth nothing. Do you hear me?

Nothing.

N O T H I NG
O
T
H
I
N
G

Nada.