England 05 v England 13

[GuyFromLancs]

05

1. Trescothick
2. Strauss
3. Vaughan
4. Bell
5. KP
6. Flintoff
7. Jones
8. Giles
9. Hoggard
10. Jones
11. Harmison


13

1. Cook
2. Root
3. Trott
4. KP
5. Bell
6. <insert preferred>
7. Prior
8. Bresnan
9. Broad
10. Swann
11. Anderson


As they were/are at the time in question.

Who wins?

 

[sledger]

England would win.

 

[Goughy]

England would win.

Or draw

 

[GuyFromLancs]

I guess this thread was kinda begging to be spammed by trolls.

My bad

 

[Spark]

Yeah, uh, let's avoid the ableist slurs and the like from now on in general. We're really good on similar stuff usually, let's try to take that across to this case.

 

[Goughy]

Interesting. I have clearly lived outside the Western world for far too long. I hadn't heard the expression "ableist slur" before. Anyway, right on.

Quick research shows that 'lame' is considered an ableist slur and it is used pretty frequently on here. Is it banned?

 

[Jono]

On paper its arguable that 2013 is the better team, but I don't think they've done anything as magnificent as 2005 did in 2004/05 when they beat South Africa and Australia back-to-back.

 

[sledger]

On paper I suspect you'd quite like to go back to back with Bob Backlund.

 

[OverratedSanity]

England 05 beat Australia 05, England 13 beat Australia 13. Enough to know which team hit the higher peak

 

[theegyptian]

England 05 beat Australia 05, England 13 beat Australia 13. Enough to know which team hit the higher peak

Actually that doesn't tell you which team hit the higher peak not that I disagree with you about the 05 side being better.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Actually that doesn't tell you which team hit the higher peak not that I disagree with you about the 05 side being better.

Didn't even say they were better. But beating that Australia side was one of the all time great performances. Certainly a far better feat that any achieved by this team imo.

 

[Ray.]

Didn't even say they were better. But beating that Australia side was one of the all time great performances. Certainly a far better feat that any achieved by this team imo.

I agree beating Australia of 05 was far more difficult than beating the current crop Australian side.

 

[Maximas]

The away victory the 13 team had in India was also one of the great performances IMO, but not quite as good as what the 05 team achieved. 05 is a little bit better than the current team IMO

 

[Adders]

Based purely on the standard and performances during the 2 Ashes series then 2005 wins, but 2013 is still a better team allround and has been consistently good for nearly 4 years. 2005 was good for about 18 months peaking for one incredible series then went to **** in a hurry.

Just look at the team sheets together and this is a non argument really, a couple of debatable points but England have only gone backwards in a couple of positions in the 11 IMO

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Yeah if you went man for man then the 13 side would probably come out on top if only for the fact that Bell, Prior and Swann are far better than the 05 Bell, Jones and Giles. A swing of 3 is very hard to pull back if you don't give Vaughan lots for his captaincy to pick him ahead of Trott.

Trescothick - Cook Draw
Strauss > Root
Vaughan < Trott
KP - KP Draw
Bell < Bell
Flintoff > AN Other
Jones < Prior
Giles < Swann
Hoggard < Anderson
Jones > Bresnan
Harmison < Broad

I've not gone by batting order but like for like as in Hoggard and Anderson being swing bowlers so they match up etc...

In a man for man thing I have gone for 13 over 05 but I still think the 05 side would win for some reason.

 

[Adders]

In a man for man thing I have gone for 13 over 05 but I still think the 05 side would win for some reason.

Without opening up old arguments with our Aussie mates here........Eng did not particularly play good cricket in this years Ashes (3rd gear and all that ) in 05 they were excellent, so as per the brief in the OP based on that then 05 wins. But.....

The 2013 side that toured India did play good cricket and if we are judging them at that standard then it's a different outcome IMO.

 

[Pothas]

Yeah if you went man for man then the 13 side would probably come out on top if only for the fact that Bell, Prior and Swann are far better than the 05 Bell, Jones and Giles. A swing of 3 is very hard to pull back if you don't give Vaughan lots for his captaincy to pick him ahead of Trott.

Trescothick - Cook Draw
Strauss > Root
Vaughan < Trott
KP - KP Draw
Bell < Bell
Flintoff > AN Other
Jones < Prior
Giles < Swann
Hoggard < Anderson
Jones > Bresnan
Harmison < Broad

I've not gone by batting order but like for like as in Hoggard and Anderson being swing bowlers so they match up etc...

In a man for man thing I have gone for 13 over 05 but I still think the 05 side would win for some reason.

I love Treso, one of my very favourite players ever but how is it a draw between him and Cook? Unless you are simply judging on the series just gone against the 05 series, in which case Trescothick clearly had the better series.

 

[Cabinet96]

2010/11 was better than both.

 

[Pothas]

Yeah, would go along with that.

 

[GIMH]

Without doubt