Ashes 2006/07 = Walkover?

[Robertinho]

Actually, they only have to draw...

*prays for placid wickets, rain, and Collingwood to make repeated McGlew-style innings*

But, y.. you're Norwegian. You're not even English.

 

[tooextracool]

i'm not talking about success here, i'm saying that in the initial stages of Hoggard ODI he didn't look like an incapable ODI bowler, the ODI series in India & NZ 2001/02 comes to mind where he bowled much better than the figures he got especially in India. Yes he faster i remember many times his debut at lord's to the ashes test in sydney Hoggard bowled in the high 80s..

and i can guarantee you that that never happened. Hoggard hasnt lose pace at any point of his career, hes always been bowling in the low 80s.
and i dont know how you can look more incapable when you're going about for runs like that.

 

[tooextracool]

figures don't tel the story & if you watched that ODI series you would remeber how unlucky he was during that series.

the ER doesnt lie no matter how unlucky you think he was.

 

[aussie]

When was the last time a swing bowler had such success in India then?

not many sides have had genuine swing bowlers in the last few years so not many have really gone to India.

 

[marc71178]

In which case the exact same logic can be applied to him in Australia...

 

[steds]

figures don't tel the story & if you watched that ODI series you would remeber how unlucky he was during that series.

Yeah. He was very unlucky. If only Mongia or Ganguly or Tendulkar wouldn't have middled those shots at Kolkata or Sehwag would have edged a ball at Chennai or he hadn't been dropped for the last game, his figures may have been better.

 

[aussie]

and i can guarantee you that that never happened. Hoggard hasnt lose pace at any point of his career, hes always been bowling in the low 80s.
and i dont know how you can look more incapable when you're going about for runs like that.

yes he was dropped after his debut in 2000 & wasn't pick again until the 2001 series in India, he was dropped after the ashes & didn't play any part in the 2003 home summer, forgot that?, I dont know what you have been watching but i'm certain that Hoggard use to get in over 85mph on occassions between his debut test to the SCG test, for me he started becoming a consistent 80mph bowler when he cemented his place in WI in 2004.

 

[tooextracool]

yes he was dropped after his debut in 2000 & wasn't pick again until the 2001 series in India, he was dropped after the ashes & didn't play any part in the 2003 home summer, forgot that?, I dont know what you have been watching but i'm certain that Hoggard use to get in over 85mph on occassions between his debut test to the SCG test, for me he started becoming a consistent 80mph bowler when he cemented his place in WI in 2004.

Firstly Hoggard did play against Pakistan in 2001, before he got injured and missed the Ashes. clearly you were following his career quite well.
And i find it quite amusing that you say that Hoggard was less reliant on swing and had far more pace, in the time period when he only succeeded in seamer friendly conditions. That makes so much sense. If you think Hoggard ever bowled at over 85 mph, then i recommend you go back and watch those games more clearly.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

He's gone abroad and enjoyed success in unfamiliar and unhelpful conditions in recent history. He's proved that even when the ball doesn't swing, he can bowl well and take wickets. Why not Australia?

Because he wasn't particularly dangerous in the Ashes when the ball wasn't swinging, he had a terrible time Australia last time he toured, and because very few bowlers have success in Australia. The pitches are usually pretty flat, the batsmen are good, and it's difficult. Hoggard is a quality bowler, and probably the one I'd rate most likely to have a good Ashes series this time with Jones missing, but it's going a bit too far to assume he'll perform like he did in South Africa and India. This is especially true when you consider that he's unlikely to have Flintoff and Jones taking a heap of wickets to keep him from having to bowl a lot when things aren't going his way, like last year.

If anything, the key to England's bowling success last year was the ability to "hide" the bowlers who weren't performing, due to the five man attack and the fact that one of the seamers always stood up and performed. With Giles and Jones likely to be injured, and Flintoff not bowling as well as he was, it leaves a lot for Harmison and Hoggard to do, and they were the two weakest seamers last time.

 

[steds]

Back to the title of the thread, rather than being drawn into the petty squabbling that makes CC so bloody boring, even if the Ashes isn't a walkover, the bloody VB series will be!

 

[aussie]

Firstly Hoggard did play against Pakistan in 2001, before he got injured and missed the Ashes. clearly you were following his career quite well.
And i find it quite amusing that you say that Hoggard was less reliant on swing and had far more pace, in the time period when he only succeeded in seamer friendly conditions. That makes so much sense. If you think Hoggard ever bowled at over 85 mph, then i recommend you go back and watch those games more clearly.

ok i forgot he played againts Pakistan my mistake when england played the test match in 2001 here i didn't go but other than that he was still dropped in his career while you were saying he wasn't.

I never said he was less reliant on swing btw, all i'm saying he used to bowl faster & that i'm very sure of i don't need to go back & watch to be convinced.

 

[howardj]

And since you were referring to the team being less likely to get 400+ scores, i thought you were talking about Vaughan's batting, unless of course you were referring to Simon Jones'

i was referring to their ability to win the ashes.

geez, you and marc7178 **** me to tears.

honestly, all you ever do is pick out little bits of others' posts and start or end your criticism of them with .

you've never had an original idea in your life.

 

[Top_Cat]

i dont see the connection between bowling strain and taking straight forward chances. you dont need to put too much pressure on your body to take a sitter IMO, the only thing possible is that his concentration levels were down(for whatever reason), and as i said that is no excuse for dropping the game.

You have played cricket before, haven't you? Couple that with the fact that no chance off anyone who bowls 130km/h+ is a sitter. Even taking into account that these guys are better than 99% of the cricketing world, when you bowl as much as Warnie did during the series (and, if I correctly recall he stated before the match that he was pretty stiff and sore), are 35+ years old and the bowler is quick, a catch which you might take most of the time is afforded a much greater difficultly in taking it. He's only human, after all and these factors are relevant whether you like it or not.

And, I might add, saying he 'dropped the game' is erroneous; aside from the fact that had the first catch been taken (just as much a 'sitter'), he wouldn't have been in that situation, Warnie had done everything asked of him and much, much more in that game and the series. He was the main reason Australia were still in a position to 'drop the Ashes' because without him, the match would have been a dead-rubber.

As for Hoggard, I definitely expect an improved performance from him this time 'round although, as has been pointed out, swing bowlers don't always prosper here. His reasons for lack of success here last time relate to why he had success in India; form. He didn't bowl well here because he just didn't bowl very well. In India, in tougher conditions for swing bowlers, he was impressive because he was in form. This time 'round, I think he's bringing some form with him and will do the job, especially in low-bouncing places like Adelaide, Bellerive and Perth ().

As for the rest of them, Harmi, I think, will step-up. He's going to be knuckle-bustingly difficult to play in Brisbane and Melbourne I reckon. It's the rest of the bowlers who I worry about, especially the spinners; finger-spinners have had nothing but disastrous series' here in Aus for as long as I've been watching cricket and I expect the trend to continue.

 

[howardj]

Yeah Monty will 'go the journey'.

The Aussies monster left arm offies.

He's nowhere near as good as Vettori, who the Aussies dispatch with ease (Ok, maybe not with ease, but he hardly presents a huge threat).

 

[tooextracool]

i was referring to their ability to win the ashes.

geez, you and marc7178 **** me to tears.

honestly, all you ever do is pick out little bits of others' posts and start or end your criticism of them with .

you've never had an original idea in your life.

Are you a clown?
you initially state something that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever and when corrected you end up saying oh i didnt mean that i meant their overall ability to win the Ashes. Whether or not you were trying to make a point with your post, which apparently you werent, i was by saying that Vaughan's batting is something that was disposable to the England side. You should be honored by the fact that i even read what you post.

 

[Mister Wright]

Are you a clown?
you initially state something that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever and when corrected you end up saying oh i didnt mean that i meant their overall ability to win the Ashes. Whether or not you were trying to make a point with your post, which apparently you werent, i was by saying that Vaughan's batting is something that was disposable to the England side. You should be honored by the fact that i even read what you post.

You're the clown if you think Vaughan's batting is disposable! When at full form he is in the top 5 batsman in the world and certainly England's best. Even at something lke 75-80% Vaughan is still a magnificent batsman and still England's best, and is certainly in no way disposable.

 

[steds]

You should be honored by the fact that i even read what you post.

Haha. Arrogance, a terrible thing.

 

[tooextracool]

You have played cricket before, haven't you? Couple that with the fact that no chance off anyone who bowls 130km/h+ is a sitter. Even taking into account that these guys are better than 99% of the cricketing world, when you bowl as much as Warnie did during the series (and, if I correctly recall he stated before the match that he was pretty stiff and sore), are 35+ years old and the bowler is quick, a catch which you might take most of the time is afforded a much greater difficultly in taking it. He's only human, after all and these factors are relevant whether you like it or not..

I might not have played professional cricket before, but i've certainly played some high level local games, and as a wicket keeper i've even kept wicket for 2 consecutive games on the same day. Which anyone whos kept wicket would know is extremely exhausting especially for someone whos not a professional player. As such ive never dropped a straight forward chance because i was too tired. I dont buy into the excuse about him being 35 years old or being stiff and sore, because he didnt even have to move to take that catch, it came straight to him. As i said, the only thing that might have dropped was his concentration level, and he wasnt focussing. There is no excuse however for that.

And, I might add, saying he 'dropped the game' is erroneous; aside from the fact that had the first catch been taken (just as much a 'sitter'), he wouldn't have been in that situation, Warnie had done everything asked of him and much, much more in that game and the series. He was the main reason Australia were still in a position to 'drop the Ashes' because without him, the match would have been a dead-rubber.

As a coach or captain, when 2 or more players drop a catch you have to talk to both of them. You cant just tell one person off and tell the other that it was ok because hed done more for the cause before that. As ive said before a mistake is a mistake no matter who does it and when its comitted. Warne may have done a lot more for the cause, but the fact that he dropped the most important catch of the series, was something that cost Australia the game. And i dont think i would consider Warne as a great slipper anyways.

As for Hoggard, I definitely expect an improved performance from him this time 'round although, as has been pointed out, swing bowlers don't always prosper here. His reasons for lack of success here last time relate to why he had success in India; form. He didn't bowl well here because he just didn't bowl very well. In India, in tougher conditions for swing bowlers, he was impressive because he was in form. This time 'round, I think he's bringing some form with him and will do the job, especially in low-bouncing places like Adelaide, Bellerive and Perth ().

i disagree. He didnt bowl well in Australia last time, because quite frankly he wasnt good enough. He had no variety in his bowling, too often he tried to pitch it up when there was no swing and would hence end up being mince meat for the batsmen. Only recently(only after the Ashes) has he started to develop a bit of variety in his bowling and the ability to bowl intelligently(his 2 card trick against Inzamam in Pakistan is the perfect example) and even more recently on the tour to India hes developed the ability to bowl reverse swing which makes him even more dangerous. Which is why i think he can do well on the tour of Australia if he bowls like he did in India.

 

[tooextracool]

You're the clown if you think Vaughan's batting is disposable! When at full form he is in the top 5 batsman in the world and certainly England's best. Even at something lke 75-80% Vaughan is still a magnificent batsman and still England's best, and is certainly in no way disposable.

and the last time we saw him in full form or even 75-80% of it for more than a game was all the way back in 2002/03. Get over it. Id like to see him play without the burden of captaincy, because thats the time when hes impressed.

 

[Mister Wright]

and the last time we saw him in full form or even 75-80% of it for more than a game was all the way back in 2002/03. Get over it. Id like to see him play without the burden of captaincy, because thats the time when hes impressed.

Even so, that doesn't make him disposible. Because, whether you like it or not, when his knee can hold the weight of his body he is in the best 6 batsman (actually, the best) in England, which means he is not disposible.