• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

**.....UNOFFICIAL.....** ASHES 2007 thread

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
marc71178 said:
Well what I'm getting fed up is seeing the same excuses being brought out after every game, and modified with no credit for the way England have performed.
It's not an excuse to say that Australia will still be a good team in 18 months and might win the Ashes back. It doesn't even reference their performance in this series, and for what it's worth it's quite true as well.
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Well the evidence in this series says a lot.

McGrath and Warne - 55 wickets @ 20.36

The rest - 33 wickets @ 47.27
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
marc71178 said:
Well the evidence in this series says a lot.

McGrath and Warne - 55 wickets @ 20.36

The rest - 33 wickets @ 47.27
That includes two guys who's careers are probably over. That doesn't actually mean Australia have nothing in the bowling department, it means Gillespie and Kasprowicz can't be relied on to be the next leaders of the attack.

Lee's had a good series, Tait's had a promising start, and there's a few guys at home who'll fancy their chances to break into the side if one of them slips up. It will be the next year or so that will determine how good Australia's reserve bowlers actually are.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
FaaipDeOiad said:
It will be the next year or so that will determine how good Australia's reserve bowlers actually are.
exactly, i'll tell you this now sean it will be though to defend Australia in all aspects now that we have lost the ashes but we will keep our chin up...
 

Steulen

International Regular
FaaipDeOiad said:
Lee's had a good series, Tait's had a promising start, and there's a few guys at home who'll fancy their chances to break into the side if one of them slips up. It will be the next year or so that will determine how good Australia's reserve bowlers actually are.
Neither Lee nor Tait are bowlers that can be the backbone of a Test attack. They can be the rough edge complement, but Australia will desperately need to find a second controlling bowler now and another one when McGrath retires.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Steulen said:
Neither Lee nor Tait are bowlers that can be the backbone of a Test attack. They can be the rough edge complement, but Australia will desperately need to find a second controlling bowler now and another one when McGrath retires.
i dont know if Australia simply needs another McGrath type bowler, they just need a bowler who can step up & become a great spearhead he doesn't have to be a McGrath.....
 

Langeveldt

Soutie
If Tait is the best of the reserve bunch, thats pretty damning! He looked very ordinary..

Interesting that this thread has more replies than the new England-Pakistan one or SA v NZ, and it doesnt even start for over another year!
 

sqwerty

U19 Cricketer
marc71178 said:
Well what I'm getting fed up is seeing the same excuses being brought out after every game, and modified with no credit for the way England have performed.
Prior to the series I always said the ashes would be close and have said throughout the series that England have played well.

Prior to this series most people either felt the same way or else thought it would be another cakewalk for Australia. Even the England team stated they wanted to 'compete' and hoped they might do ok.

But most people agreed that if England were to win the ashes the following had to take place:

England had to play out of their skin.........................they did
Australia had to be below par...................................they were
England had to somehow find 20 wickets a match.....they did easily
England had to have some luck................................they did
England had to remain injury free..............................they mostly did (moreso than Australia anyway)

As such they won the Ashes 2-1 by the narrowest of margins and deserved to. Those 2 runs at Edgbaston made all the difference.

The series went down to the wire and England were only comfortable after tea on the final day of the final test.

As for Australia - the only reason they would make wholesale changes is if they are planning for the future. If they want to pick the best XI for the super series and the next ashes series they would more or less put the current side on the park as they are still more or less the best players in the country.

You wouldn't drop Hayden (who will always play well in Australia) or Martyn (who hit 8 centuries in the last 18 months and is by no means past it) or Clarke (Australia's player of the year and future star) or probably even Katich. And you definitely wouldn't drop Gilchrist, Langer or Ponting. As for the bowlers - Warne, McGrath and Lee walk straight in and are still performing. Lee bowled a hell of a lot better than his Ashes stats suggest.

It all depends if the selectors believe now is the time to sacrifice some current results for the sake of the future.

As far as I'm concerned this series and the result is the best thing that could have happened for Australian cricket. For the last decade test cricket, in most Australians minds, has been absolutely dead because of the gulf between Australia and the rest of the world. The Ashes has been a joke and the Australian public, whilst enjoying the side belting everybody, has no doubt craved some decent competition.

Australia lost the ashes by the narrowest of margins to a top side, dying for each other on their home soil, with a home crowd (and nation) lifting them to the peak of their abilities in the greatest and most thrilling sustained sporting competition I can ever remember .

I hardly believe it's panic stations for Australia just yet.
 
Last edited:

simmy

International Regular
Ah... you Aussies moaning just makes this all the better!

As long as the ball reverse swings in Aus... England will have every chance of retaining the Ashes.

Its all about the Aussies not being "mentally scarred" now... and they ALL have been.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
it noramally doesn't reverse down-under probably only at adelaide from memory & their is no ground in Australia were we will see such reverse swing a la edgbagston & OT.

Also i think the crowd factor will play an important role in the next Ashes series for sure, when i was at OT i really felt the encouragement the crowd gave the side really helped, so once the OZ fans do the same it will help for sure......
 

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
It's not just reverse swing that did the Aussies in. It's swing in general.

Besides, there must be some reverse swing about in Australia. How else does Shaun Tait take a bucketload of wickets at next to nothing, whilst gaining an old ball reputation?
 

mavric41

State Vice-Captain
The Maestro said:
Average of 40+ at 4 runs an over is a good series? :huh:
It was almost 5 runs an over and I thought he bowled less than intelligently. The number of times he went for consective 4's by bowling rubbish is too high to count. I thought Lee showed why he hasn't played test cricket for 14 months. His heart and commitment isn't in question, just his skill and thought processes.
 

The Maestro

School Boy/Girl Captain
cricinfo has his ER at 4.29

agree he is one of those "thick" sportsman whose results dont reflect his ability, more suited to the one day game for this reason
 

Pedro Delgado

International Debutant
The ball didn't reverse at Trent Bridge, yet England won the Test. It's not the be-all and end-all of this team.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
The Maestro said:
Average of 40+ at 4 runs an over is a good series? :huh:
figures dont tell the whole story with him, if you would have watched the entire series you would know Lee bowled pretty well in every innings except for the 1st innings at edgbagston & TB...
 

luckyeddie

Cricket Web Staff Member
marc71178 said:
Well most of us English had earmarked 2007 as the series when we had the better chance because of the aging factor (and the team gelling factor)
The talk in 2004 was that we felt that we'd have a pretty decent chance of winning the Ashes in 2007, but I don't think many of us gave us a sniff this time.

As far as Australia being 'in tatters', no way. Warne will certainly be still up for it, Lee is bound to be a handful and perhaps Tait really will fulfil the potential people were talking about and start worrying the batsman as opposed to first slip. I just don't know about Glenn McGrath - I think perhaps the body's beginning to creak a bit too much - perhaps I smell a retirement before then, but if not, that's still an attack you dismiss at your peril.

The batting line-up will see a couple of changes, but wholesale? Hardly.
 

Top