***Official*** Australia in England (The Ashes)

[Neil Pickup]

What is wrong with a little arrogence once in a while? I am prepared to make these "outlandish" statements and open myself up to criticism, but if we pull it off (like I am confident we will) then my point will be a valid one, without confidence what do we have?

Regardless to say, it is all healthy debate and there's nothing wrong with a bit of banter in the lead-up to the upcoming series.

BRING ON THE AUSSIES!

There's a major difference between confidence and arrogance.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Most of of the world's best in anything are arrogant.

It's this inflated self confidence that spurs them on.

 

[shaka]

Australia are 166/3 off 32.1 overs, wickets to Gibson, Masters, and Maddy. Hayden 107 off 96 deliveries

 

[King_Ponting]

bbc covering that game. Audio coverage just to let everyone know

 

[Jamee999]

Hi Guys, I was at Grace Road today, and I'll just tell what the highlights were for me today.

Hayden Century

Martyn's innings

Symonds' Cameo.

Ackerman's Innings

GETTING AUTOGRAPHS FROM BRAD HOGG, MICHAEL CLARKE, JASON GILLESPIE AND GLENN MCGRATH

Leicestershire losing by less than 100.

Cheers.

 

[James]

Eddie has released Part one of his three part series in previewing the 2005 Ashes

It's an amazing article and can be read on the frontpage of Cricket Web.

 

[jlo33692]

They lost 2-1 on home soil twice (SA won the 3rd Test dead rubber both times).

Sorry im not following you...Are you saying that South Africa beat Australia in Aus 2 times in a series or 2 series they beat aus in aus?
I cant find the 3 tests before the aus v SA in aus in 2001 but from memorie it was a split series (3 test in africa ) then 3 test in aus and im sure we won the SA leg 3 0 and the 2nd leg went 2 1 aus way giving 5-1 but i cannot find the results anywhwere from 2001 aus v sa in SA (first leg) Also i think aus have only ever won once in ashes 5-0 so that is why im not giving 5-0 result ,,,im going 4-0 as the weather will surely play a part...i hope the ashes lives u[ to expectations but i cant help thinking that england are not just playing a good side that has only lost 1 series in the last 20 years ( 2-1 ) v india in india but they are perhaps playing the best cricket side that has ever played the game...its a tall order to ask the 3rd or 4th ranked team in the world to beat them when the other teams could not do it. Does anyone then think that they would be able to beat the Aus in Aus over 5 tests? that is the true test of a great team..This cant be done until eng get that chance but would you really give the english some hope if you were not a supporter of Eng? try and look from that side of the coin...4-0 with 1 wash out will be the result..if Eng win a test (no dead rubbers included) i will give you my ,my, my key board and and and well my blessings...what do you think the honest scoreline will be from the series or anyone else???Remember you have to dismiss the Oz 2 times to win a test..does Eng have the bowlers to do that???? Does Aus have the bowlers to shoot Eng out 2 times?
1 team is proven the other is jst hoping i would say..however i hope they at least put up a fight in this series...good luck to them...4-0 .1 washout aus to remain undefeated v eng for 20th year in 2007 after this series.......in my opinion only

 

[JASON]

Here's My prediction- (All scientifically worked out based on probabilities, weather, player comfort etc. Based on complex Mathematical prediction Model !! )

20/20 - England.

Nat West Series - England 2-1(3 games v Australia)

Nat West challenge - Australia 3-0 ( 3 games)

Ashes - 5 Tests - 2-2 with a drawn Test !! Australia retain the Ashes !!

 

[Nate]

Eddie has released Part one of his three part series in previewing the 2005 Ashes

It's an amazing article and can be read on the frontpage of Cricket Web.

It sure is amazing. Ridiculously long, but facinating none-the-less.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

So when was the last time you managed to go through an Ashes series without losing a Test?

That would be 90/91, I suppose. To be fair, Australia went fairly close in both of the last two series, only losing the final test.

 

[aussie]

Post 2007 WC I can see people like Jaques, Hodge, Watson, Tait and Macgill (or maybe even someone like Cullen) making their way into the Australian team.

na faaip i dont think Macgill will have a look up during that time, but i can definately see that being a weakness of australia when warne retires since australia will have a whole set of young spinners with at this stage none has stood out has the next certain aussie test spinner

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Nat West Series - England 2-1(3 games v Australia)

So, you think Bangladesh will make the final then?

Anyway, my tips:

20/20: Australia
NWS: Australia 7-0, England 3-4, Bangladesh 0-6.
NWC: Australia 2-1
Ashes: Australia 3-1

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

na faaip i dont think Macgill will have a look up during that time, but i can definately see that being a weakness of australia when warne retires since australia will have a whole set of young spinners with at this stage none has stood out has the next certain aussie test spinner

Macgill has said he will play on after Warne retires if he can. I think if no obvious replacement has come through, he will do just that.

 

[aussie]

TBF it was a credit to Taylor's team that they were able to come back from a 3-0 drubbing in the ODIs & a thumping in the 1st test. Although we're now a much more resilient team than we were even 18 months ago I do wonder if we could recover in such a fashion.

I know one must allow for the respective strengths of the teams, but The Windies outplayed us in the Nat West last year & we were able to recover to whitewash them in the tests. So I hope a poor showing in the ODIs won't necessarily set the tone now. Actualy, of course I hope we don't have a poor showing, but we remain fairly unconvincing as an ODI outfit.

right on mate, england have never been anything special in ODI for has long has i can remember so even if the aussies win most of the ODI's againts us, it will have some sort of a negative effect on england before the start of the ahses series but that has been the trend for most of england's succesful 2004. So i would think they would still be able to hold their own throughtout the test series

 

[aussie]

Macgill has said he will play on after Warne retires if he can. I think if no obvious replacement has come through, he will do just that.

Maybe he will but something tells me because he will be 36 in 2007, the aussie selectors will want to look to the future

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Maybe he will but something tells me because he will be 36 in 2007, the aussie selectors will want to look to the future

Sure, but Warne is almost that age now and they're certainly sticking with him. If it's a choice between a 36 year old Macgill or a White or a Hauritz, they'll pick Macgill. Hopefully Cullen can continue to improve, or someone else will stand up.

 

[aussie]

Sure, but Warne is almost that age now and they're certainly sticking with him. If it's a choice between a 36 year old Macgill or a White or a Hauritz, they'll pick Macgill. Hopefully Cullen can continue to improve, or someone else will stand up.

I'm hoping White can step up

 

[Adamc]

Eddie has released Part one of his three part series in previewing the 2005 Ashes

It's an amazing article and can be read on the frontpage of Cricket Web.

Hehe, was just about to post the same thing. Here's a link for those too lazy.

 

[jlo33692]

need some help

Can anyone please help me ..
I have a bet but need to know how many ways is there to be given out in cricket?
the actual question is how many ways and what are they for a batsman to be dismissed in test cricket?????
i can get bowled
caught,
stumped
run out,
LBW
out handling ball
playing on (or is that still just bowled)?
timed out.(late getting out within the time limit to bat)
Mankadded???stumped when bowler runs into bowl and batsman leaves crease ,does not let ball go and turns round and stumps batsman???or is that just stumped?????
does anyone else have any other way to be dismissed please?????

 

[Adamc]

Can anyone please help me ..
I have a bet but need to know how many ways is there to be given out in cricket?
the actual question is how many ways and what are they for a batsman to be dismissed in test cricket?????
i can get bowled
caught,
stumped
run out,
LBW
out handling ball
playing on (or is that still just bowled)?
timed out.(late getting out within the time limit to bat)
Mankadded???stumped when bowler runs into bowl and batsman leaves crease ,does not let ball go and turns round and stumps batsman???or is that just stumped?????
does anyone else have any other way to be dismissed please?????

There are ten ways to be given out (though, arguably, eleven ways to get out):

bowled;
caught;
LBW;
stumped;
run out;
hit wicket;
handled the ball;
obstruction (obstructing the fielders);
timed out;
and hit the ball twice.

The other way of being out (as opposed to being given out) is to simply retire yourself out. This happened a couple of times in a SL v Bangladesh game, when the batsmen (Atapattu and Jayawardene) decided to retire to give others a go.

Being 'Mankaded' is the same as run out, though it virtually never happens, as there are a lot of restrictions on when it can take place.