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

[BoyBrumby]

I think all this talk of Australia being “overrated” & not having been (should that be “being”?) a great team is poppycock. Firstly, and crucially, it isn’t true; secondly tho it downgrades England’s achievements hugely. I think we’ve been privileged to witness what I think is the greatest series of my lifetime (certainly of series involving England & I go back to the mid/late 80s) & Australia have played a full part in that. Warne has been magnificent & Lee not too far behind.

Of course the obvious point is that Australia (the current XI) are a team in decline. I think it is very easy to blame the selectors for sticking with players who are maybe just on the downside of the hill for too long, but frankly they haven’t done too badly up til now, have they? & the oldest player? Well, he hasn’t done too badly this series either!

I’ve nothing personal against him (honestly!), but Hayden does look in poor form, no two ways about it. He seems a shadow of the player he was (only last year his career average was v nearly 63! That’s more than Headley or Pollock & second only to you-know-who) & one has to ask: why? It’s v easy to blame his age, but really at 33 he should be close to his peak. I think the answer has to be connected to the relative dearth of decent fast bowling he’s had to face. As others in this thread have mentioned he struggled to establish himself in the Oz test XI (his first 13 tests were spread over 7 years & he averaged a paltry 24). His rise coincided with the decline of Wasim & Waqar, the beginning of the end for Donald (who was the first man to dismiss Matty in test cricket) & the end of the Windies conveyor belt. The only really class pacer somewhere near his peak he’s faced until this series has been Shoaib, who seems to find constantly new & exciting ways to be minorly injured.

England have bowled v well to him, Vaughan has used field placings cleverly which has made the big fella have to think. I’m not bagging his intellect, but he’s obviously a v instinctive player, so checking his shots probably doesn’t come easily. I think he needs to be dropped for his own good now & find a way of overcoming his demons, be they technical or mental. Bags of runs for QLD got him into the XI before & may well yet again.

Gilly has been disappointing too. He’s been Australia’s “get out of jail free” card for eons now, so his lack of runs have really highlighted the top 6’s failings. In NZ before the Ashes Oz’s top order slumped in the first innings of each test, but every time Superman flew to the rescue. Not this time tho. Is it just one of those cases where a bowler has a batter's number (a la Gooch & Alderman or Atherton & Everybody ) with he & Fred? I think we may see an innings from Gilly in the 5th test. Just a feeling (fear?).

 

[Slow Love™]

What?

Either that or Aus said "OK, we don't like NZ, so we're going to go slow and make sure they don't qualify". Either way it's out of order.

First of all, there was never any serious suggestion of an "arrangement" between the West Indies and Australia.

Second - the tactic was purely in Australia's interests, not because they "didn't like NZ". If NZ had gone through to the Super Sixes, Australia wouldn't have carried through two points over from the first round.

And third - Chris Cairns said at the time that NZ would have done exactly the same thing. I'd draw the line at deliberately losing matches, but slowing down how quickly you win a game you're winning comfortably in order to advance your own interests in a tournament is a different thing.

 

[Barney Rubble]

First of all, there was never any serious suggestion of an "arrangement" between the West Indies and Australia.

Second - the tactic was purely in Australia's interests, not because they "didn't like NZ". If NZ had gone through to the Super Sixes, Australia wouldn't have carried through two points over from the first round.

And third - Chris Cairns said at the time that NZ would have done exactly the same thing. I'd draw the line at deliberately losing matches, but slowing down how quickly you win a game in order to advance your own interests in a tournament is a different thing.

Sorry. I didn't realise it was in Australia's own interests - all I had heard about that match in the past was that it was to the detriment of NZ, not that it would benefit Aus in any way.

Point officially withdrawn.

 

[superkingdave]

good news for Håkon, from cricinfo

"Such has been the global interest in the series that Channel 4 have been approached a number of countries, including Norway and Japan, to take coverage of the fifth Test. "

 

[BoyBrumby]

good news for Håkon, from cricinfo

"Such has been the global interest in the series that Channel 4 have been approached a number of countries, including Norway and Japan, to take coverage of the fifth Test. "

Bloody hell! Where Sam leads, Norway follows!

 

[howardj]

I have a question: if you chaps had a fellow Aussie who supported England during the
Ashes, what would become of him/her?

I'd venture you'd take him out to the dark lands and set a razorback on him.

As Ive gotten older, I more want a good contest than anything else. If I was given the choice at the start of the series, of an easy Australia win or a magnificent series with England winning the Ashes, I would opt for the latter. As I say, when I was a kid, I was screaming for Australia to win, but now I'm an adult, I care more about the game of cricket and seeing a good contest. I cheered loudly for England in the closing stages of the 2nd Test match.

I don't really see it as unpatriotic, because I don't think cricket is important enough to be wildly patriotic about it. If we were fighting a war, and the future of Australia was at stake, then I'd unconditionally cheer for Australia, but cricket is hardly on that scale of importance. Having said that, I will probably burst into tears if Hayden gets dropped.

 

[Slow Love™]

I’ve nothing personal against him (honestly!), but Hayden does look in poor form, no two ways about it. He seems a shadow of the player he was (only last year his career average was v nearly 63! That’s more than Headley or Pollock & second only to you-know-who) & one has to ask: why? It’s v easy to blame his age, but really at 33 he should be close to his peak.

I don't think many batsmen hit their peak two months away from being 34, somehow.

I was reading an article last night by Malcolm Conn that was referencing the ages of the Aussie batsmen. Apparently just about every regular opener prior to Langer and Hayden were gone by the age of 33 - none of them had held their position after turning 35 since Bill Brown 60 years ago. Only two other top-order regulars, Mark Taylor and Ian Redpath, made it to 34 (prior to this team). Some of these guys, along with Keith Stackpole and Geoff Marsh, felt that moving past 32 meant a substantial depreciation in speed and reflexes. Perhaps Hayden's problem in this regard has been more of a stubborness to accept this and adjust his game, and is why he so often looks impatient and gets out doing that arrogantly looking step down the pitch.

 

[Slow Love™]

You've clearly not seen any posts by "aussie", the Englishman then; gadzooks, I do despair sometimes.

I have a question: if you chaps had a fellow Aussie who supported England during the
Ashes, what would become of him/her?

I'd venture you'd take him out to the dark lands and set a razorback on him.

In aussie's case I would. And I'd make it a gay razorback.

(Only those that read off-topic are likely to get this.)

 

[maxpower]

Hayden and Gilchrist's no show is suprising and worrying, and from little that I have seen of the series so far is that ENG just have been bowling really well, and not to mention bowling to a cleverly set field by Vaughn, and Aussies being naturally aggressive batsmen have been forced to play poor shots, and probably cannot change their style playing cautious overnight. Even if Hayden, Gilchrist and rest of Aus are having bad form, I am pretty sure they would still manage to do better against any other attack.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I don't think many batsmen hit their peak two months away from being 34, somehow.

I was reading an article last night by Malcolm Conn that was referencing the ages of the Aussie batsmen. Apparently just about every regular opener prior to Langer and Hayden were gone by the age of 33 - none of them had held their position after turning 35 since Bill Brown 60 years ago. Only two other top-order regulars, Mark Taylor and Ian Redpath, made it to 34 (prior to this team). Some of these guys, along with Keith Stackpole and Geoff Marsh, felt that moving past 32 meant a substantial depreciation in speed and reflexes. Perhaps Hayden's problem in this regard has been more of a stubborness to accept this and adjust his game, and is why he so often looks impatient and gets out doing that arrogantly looking step down the pitch.

No, fair enough. But even if he is slightly past his best I think such a dizzying drop in returns has to be more than just anno Domini catching up with him.

 

[Slow Love™]

No, fair enough. But even if he is slightly past his best I think such a dizzying drop in returns has to be more than just anno Domini catching up with him.

Oh sure, IMO it is, and I'm in favor of him being dropped. Poor concentration and a lack of respect for the bowling he's faced inevitably have a lot to do with his slump. And he is obviously vulnerable to swing bowling, whether he'd handled it a lot better in the past or not.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

In aussie's case I would. And I'd make it a gay razorback.

(Only those that read off-topic are likely to get this.)

Please don't tell me he's homophobic too? Or am I wide of the mark.

 

[matty1818]

lol at all you aussies biting the flam-bait. I was just saying that people should not just question the form of a batsmen against a good bowling attack but also his skill aswell. Hayden's inability to cope with swing his hard to put completely down to form but is more likely down to a fundamental problem with his game. I know all batsmen have faults, but this one has been key to the series along with his inability to try and combat it. The same goes (to a lesser extent) to Gillys refusal to try and dig in against the round the wicket approach, hence eventual flashes outside off and knicks etc. A talent of a batsmen shouldnt just be measured on how well he plays with his natural ability but how he deals with the times when things arent going his way due to one reason or another.

The only Australian player who has performances can be completely put down to either lack of form or decline can be Gillespie.

 

[Slow Love™]

Or am I wide of the mark.

I should probably limit the discussion of this subject to this post, 'cause it's off-topic, but I would say you were not wide of the mark.

 

[greg]

Sorry. I didn't realise it was in Australia's own interests - all I had heard about that match in the past was that it was to the detriment of NZ, not that it would benefit Aus in any way.

Point officially withdrawn.

No I'm sorry that's not good enough. In the same competition England decided to take 15 overs to score the winning 40odd runs they needed to beat Sri Lanka, a performance which subsequently resulted in them being eliminated from the tournament on runrate. A truly altruistic performance.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

I should probably limit the discussion of this subject to this post, 'cause it's off-topic, but I would say you were not wide of the mark.

Jesus tonight

 

[marc71178]

Great news... Channel 4 are trying to offload the ****ty horse racing which would interrupt the coverage of the final Test on the Saturday.

http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/engvaus/content/story/217640.html

Pity it's taken them till their last ever Test to do it.

 

[marc71178]

Argh, some people are so rude. Who sets a wedding date on the 3rd Day of a Test Match?! *shakes head*

I had one this weekend.

And to make it worse, the hotel we were in all afternoon didn't have a TV in the bar

 

[Pratters]

I had one this weekend.

And to make it worse, the hotel we were in all afternoon didn't have a TV in the bar

And you must have rued work on Ashes days so much. I would have wanted to watch each ball of this series despite having no association with England or Australia.

 

[marc71178]

particularly when (unlike in the previous two cases) they are replaced not by the named 12th man but by a specialist fielder.

Except Tremlett has never been named 12th man in this series.