The Ashes won't be close

[howardj]

I think the only way that this series will be remotly close is if England take the game to the Aussies.

First test at Lords they have to bat first and bat like NZ batted today. The only weakness I saw at all from this Australian team over the last month or so is that when they are put under pressure they tend to struggle. When the aussie bowlers were getting hit for 8-10 runs an over they started bowling all over the show. Even McGrath couldn't keep the ball on a consistant good length.

When you attack them you have a greater chance of success. They key is to show the intent early on and see how the Aussies respond because lets face it Australia don't get put under many pressure situations so they aren't used to it as much.

With the bat, England must attempt to storm Australia's fortress, with players like Vaughan, Flintoff and Pietersen. You have to get Australia's bowlers out of their comfort zone. Allow McGrath and Warne to tie you down and bowl where they want to bowl, and the show is over.

 

[Scaly piscine]

I doubt Butcher will play against Oz anyway, so he's not worth worrying about. The reason I think the Ashes will be close is because against most teams Australia have been at parity midway (roughly) through a game and then their opponents have folded, I don't expect England to fold like NZ, Pakistan etc. have done. I also expect England to play far better than they did in SA. Bangladesh and the ODI series should get players in form and the inevitable victories will get the confidence back up.

 

[Neil Pickup]

What it will, in all likelihood, come down to will be whether Australia's bowling attack stays fit and firing throughout. Our bowling attack is definitely able to match the Aussie batsman should they be on their game - but I'm more concerned about whether the batting is able to deal with - in particular - McGrath and Warne at full power.

 

[Neil Pickup]

As far as aggression/defence goes - it's nothing complex - players do better playing their natural game. Oram, Jayasuriya et al are naturally positive players, so will do better against anyone playing in an aggressive manner, whilst Butcher, Hussain and Richardson are the inverse.

 

[telsor]

Agreed Neil, playing your natural game is the best way to play.

Trouble is, then it comes down to which side has the best 'natural' team, and I would hazard a guess that that is Australia.

That being the case, the question becomes that if, by playing 'unnaturally', you can cause a greater disruption to the opposition that it causes to your own performance.

Again, I think that approach favors Australia, but it does create a biggest question mark over the result.

I suppose the tactics depend on how close England really think they are. The closer they are, the more likely the 'natural game' approach should be favored.

 

[SJS]

Some players who have scored runs against them when they have been aggressive- Sehwag, Oram, Cairns, Vaughn (he may not have had a big strike rate but he was positive).

I think you have a very valid point. It seemed so true that I went back to check the last couple of dozen century makers against Australia.

Their average run rate per 100 balls is 62 which is pretty good for test matches.

12 of the 24 average abobe 60 and only one century was scored at under 50 (Ganga's 117 at just under 50 at 49.2).

9 of them actually scored over 70 runs per 100 balls.

So clearly those who have succeeded against the Aussies individually havent been plodders at least.

Vaughans three hundreds in the last Ashes series were scored at 63 runs per 100 balls. Considering it was a losing cause, clearly the scoring rate was pretty good.

 

[Zinzan]

It all depends - he'll cause all sorts of problems if we have pitches like these, but given that that's unlikely, no, he won't trouble them, because fingerspinners never do on normal English pitches.
But given how many of the Australian batsmen have clear weaknesses against the turning ball, he'll knock them over plenty on a turning pitch.[/QUOTE

Problem with that theory is that any pitch that Giles gets turn on, Warne will turn it sideways

 

[Steulen]

It all depends - he'll cause all sorts of problems if we have pitches like these, but given that that's unlikely, no, he won't trouble them, because fingerspinners never do on normal English pitches.
But given how many of the Australian batsmen have clear weaknesses against the turning ball, he'll knock them over plenty on a turning pitch.[/QUOTE

Problem with that theory is that any pitch that Giles gets turn on, Warne will turn it sideways

Even more problematic is that on a pitch where Giles gets turn, Clarke and maybe Lehmann (if there) will be licking their lips to lower their averages. As if Clarke's average isn't absurd already...

 

[kendall]

Even more problematic is that on a pitch where Giles gets turn, Clarke and maybe Lehmann (if there) will be licking their lips to lower their averages. As if Clarke's average isn't absurd already...

why are you worrying about clarkes bowling? what about warne, and besides giles bowling is alot better than clarkes.

 

[Steulen]

why are you worrying about clarkes bowling? what about warne, and besides giles bowling is alot better than clarkes.

Because somehow Clarke seems to be developing a habit of taking extremely cheap wickets once conditions are right.

 

[psxpro]

Giles wont trouble australia. If he does then Warne will destroy them.

 

[marc71178]

Although of course if this is a last innings wicket, Warne won't have the chance.

 

[psxpro]

He doesn't need the last day wicket.

 

[marc71178]

Surely by definition if Giles destroys Australia in the 4th Innings then Warne doesn't get a chance to respond though!

 

[Langeveldt]

Becasue I just don't like English sports teams.

Care to say why? Don't like the colour? Scared of Lions? or just prejudiced?

 

[Zinzan]

Surely by definition if Giles destroys Australia in the 4th Innings then Warne doesn't get a chance to respond though!

Can you really see that happening ?

 

[psxpro]

Care to say why? Don't like the colour? Scared of Lions? or just prejudiced?

I find most of english fans to be idiots, not all but a lot.
Even ones ive met. They are the worst winners and the worst losers. only the matches they win matters, and they dont do it in a funny/humourous way, they are just dry.

I'm not the only one, most people dont like english teams becasue of their fans.

 

[Deja moo]

I find most of english fans to be idiots, not all but a lot.
Even ones ive met. They are the worst winners and the worst losers. only the matches they win matters, and they dont do it in a funny/humourous way, they are just dry.

Stick around here for a while and you'll realize it isnt so at all.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I find most of english fans to be idiots, not all but a lot.
Even ones ive met. They are the worst winners and the worst losers. only the matches they win matters, and they dont do it in a funny/humourous way, they are just dry.

I'm not the only one, most people dont like english teams becasue of their fans.

Wow. That is almost ironic.

 

[Gangster]

I want England to win and that's solely because it's getting boring to see Australia win match after match. IMO, they are the only team that has a chance of beating the Aussies. But then again, I don't think it will happen, Australia is in a brutal mood and will pounce on any weak element of England's team.

Yeah cuz it's not like India hasn't beaten them in the recent past or come close to it...