England post ashes 13/14

[91Jmay]

Those guys had become **** by the time England toured India. Plus take out Monty, and England may well have lost the series 3-0 instead of winning it 2-1. Wasn't a very collectively awesome performance.

Those players were still there, therefore illustrating that a 'massive generational departure' hadn't occured as he stated. Right, Monty had more of an effect on the series than KP, Cook or Swann. That's definitely not bollocks.

[Spikey]

may as well catalogue all the articles

Ashes 2013-14: Five ways it all went wrong for England | Vic Marks | Sport | theguardian.com
The Ashes 2013-14 : George Dobell on how England lost the series | Cricket Features | England in Australia - The Ashes | ESPN Cricinfo

[MW1304]

BBC Sport - Ashes 2013-14: Where has it gone wrong for England?

The 'brand of cricket' brigade have been given license to return in full force.

[MW1304]

I love the revisionism being trotted out about our win in India. Jesus **** that was an immense team effort, don't degrade it a year later when the team is playing on the other end of the scale.

[ImpatientLime]

Those guys had become **** by the time England toured India. Plus take out Monty, and England may well have lost the series 3-0 instead of winning it 2-1. Wasn't a very collectively awesome performance.

He was the one who changed the whole course of the series by picking up so many wickets first up in the all crucial Mumbai Test. It was his inclusion that suddenly put India's batting line-up under immense pressure and his team-mates just benefitted from it and were able to run home the advantage.
It's sort of like how Johnson's spell in Gabba paved the path for their Ashes victory. Clarke & Warner scored big. Harris and co started chipping in more. His performance inspired his team-mates into bigger things.

English cricketer contributes to English series win shock horror.

[wpdavid]

I love the revisionism being trotted out about our win in India. Jesus **** that was an immense team effort, don't degrade it a year later when the team is playing on the other end of the scale.

True, it was a great performance. However, whether it's enough to justify the commonly held view that this is a great team is still questionable. Context and consistency are everything. I wouldn't argue that Wigan are a great football team because they beat Man City to win the FA Cup. The bigger picture is that they weren't good enough not to be relegated. Looking at England's performances over the last two years, apart from in India, they've been found wanting when there's been a serious challenge. Good enough to beat WI and NZ in England and to get a healthy lead against Aus at home when they were still a shambles. Well beaten by Pakistan, SA and now Aus. Lucky to draw in NZ. And even at home to NZ, got away with only setting about 200 because NZ's batting was so woeful. The win in India was terrfic, but it hasn't been the norm.

[vic_orthdox]

I love the revisionism being trotted out about our win in India. Jesus **** that was an immense team effort, don't degrade it a year later when the team is playing on the other end of the scale.

Yup, but it seems like that the success brought about by that series win continued to be used as the blueprint going forward.

[Noppe]

At what moment in the series did England realize how **** they are? Think it was somewhere in Adelaide imo

[MW1304]

Yup, but it seems like that the success brought about by that series win continued to be used as the blueprint going forward.

I agree. It is the classic thing that English teams have done in recent times, climb one mountain and then drastically collapse down the oncoming slope. The legacy of this generation will forever be tarnished by that. However that doesn't tarnish what actually happened in India which was a monumental achievement taken in isolation. Centurymaker's comments in particular are grating examples of revisionism.

[91Jmay]

True, it was a great performance. However, whether it's enough to justify the commonly held view that this is a great team is still questionable. Context and consistency are everything. I wouldn't argue that Wigan are a great football team because they beat Man City to win the FA Cup. The bigger picture is that they weren't good enough not to be relegated. Looking at England's performances over the last two years, apart from in India, they've been found wanting when there's been a serious challenge. Good enough to beat WI and NZ in England and to get a healthy lead against Aus at home when they were still a shambles. Well beaten by Pakistan, SA and now Aus. Lucky to draw in NZ. And even at home to NZ, got away with only setting about 200 because NZ's batting was so woeful. The win in India was terrfic, but it hasn't been the norm.

Comparing a team, in a different sport, winning a match after 120 minutes or whatever it was to a team beating another after 15 days of cricket seems a very odd comparison.

I agree with the general point though that we have been largely poor for two years though. Hard to see how we right the ship to be honest, need to find a blend of new players and experienced ones who are just out of form.

[Prince EWS]

Anderson needs managing now he's getting on a bit. I'd be tapping him on the shoulder wrt one dayers and have him as a test match only bowler. It's not like there aren't a lot of seam bowlers who are better batsmen than him who can play in Odis.

England's OD bowling reserves are even poorer than their Test bowling reserves at the moment and there's a World Cup next year. He probably doesn't need to play many of the ODIs leading up to that World Cup but he will almost certainly play the tournament itself, and he won't be easily replaced if he doesn't.

[wpdavid]

Comparing a team, in a different sport, winning a match after 120 minutes or whatever it was to a team beating another after 15 days of cricket seems a very odd comparison.

I agree with the general point though that we have been largely poor for two years though. Hard to see how we right the ship to be honest, need to find a blend of new players and experienced ones who are just out of form.

Yeah, the analogy doesn't hold up 100%, even though Wigan did win 5 other games to get that far. And there's probably cricket comparisons to be found but I really CBA just now.

I suppose one tough question is whether our experienced players are out of form or in decline. I suspect that Prior and Cook are in the former category, probably Swann as well. But I fear that Anderson and KP are in the latter. And Trott's a gonner imo. The problem then is that even if they are in decline, Jimmy and KP are still superior to the alternatives, so this isn't going to be easy. I'd still play Anderson next summer, given that we haven't a clue who are 3rd seamer is. Depending how it goes, he might still be around for the 2015 Ashes, but it would be an act of supreme cruelty to take him over there again. He really does need a consistently threatening opening partner. By rights, Broad should be first change, which he probably won't like, but so what. If SB wants to open the bowling, he should be doing some damage with the new ball far more frequently. Most of his best spells have come with an older ball anyway. As for KP, is his heart really in it? His whole approach being 'that's the way I play' adds up to one memorable innings in a series and not much else. Maybe two if it's a longer series. I know there are batsmen like Gooch who only hit top gear from their mid30s, but I think they're the exception rather than the rule. I really want to avoid 12 to 18 months of batsmen 'doing enough' to stay in the side thanks to occasionally good knocks, but that's what will happen if the selectors don't make some brave calls now. And as I've said elsewhere, I'd start in Melbourne.

The other tough question will be about who should come in. Given the question marks over the middle order, I'd actually stick with Carberry for a while. Certainly until someone else makes a serious case for an opener's position. No idea who that might be. Nor do I have any strong views about who'se a better bet out of Ballance, Taylor or whoever else is on the fringe, beyond suggesting that Bairstow was unfairly scapegoated for his part in the home series, given the performances of the more experienced guys most of the time. Whether rthat makes him better than Ballance or Taylor, I have no idea.

[GIMH]

Yeah always thought Broad was like Freddie in as much as he seemed to be better at first change

[Riggins]

England's OD bowling reserves are even poorer than their Test bowling reserves at the moment and there's a World Cup next year. He probably doesn't need to play many of the ODIs leading up to that World Cup but he will almost certainly play the tournament itself, and he won't be easily replaced if he doesn't.

I guess the point is that even if he doesn't play it, who gives a ****?

[Daemon]

It's pretty tough atm for England. There are no major selection **** ups that other countries have had when they've slumped and no easy selections to make in terms of dropping and selecting people. The guys who can win matches for England are all in the side already, the only thing that can get the side winning proper series is basically to collectively raise the standard of cricket they've played.