The Ashes - For the neutrals

[Dasa]

India got thoroughly outplayed against Australia, so it's doubtful you can say India are any better against Australia than England will be - England would have to comprehensively lose the first 3 Tests to be worse than India were.

I'm trying to work out what this means. When did India comprehensively lose 3 Tests against Aus since the 99/00 series?

 

[Scaly piscine]

I'm trying to work out what this means. When did India comprehensively lose 3 Tests against Aus since the 99/00 series?

India comprehensively lost 2 of the first 3 Tests against Australia in the last series, to be worse than that performance England would have to comprehensively lose all 3 of the first 3 Tests against Australia.

 

[kendall]

I hate English sports teams and support every other team they are playing against in any sport..

I support all other teams when they are playing against Aus as well other than England.

So the Ashes are quite fun for me because it's the only time in cricket that I actually want Australia to do well and I can sit back and watch their briliance and actually enjoy it.

i hate people who make stupid remarks, surely it will be better for cricket if england win,

 

[Slow Love™]

LOL, you have to laugh when you look at the results of the poll. Of the 13 "neutrals" to vote for Australia so far, at least six of them are Aussie supporters.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

LOL, you have to laugh when you look at the results of the poll. Of the 13 "neutrals" to vote for Australia so far, at least six of them are Aussie supporters.

Hey, I missed the "neutrals only" bit.

 

[Zinzan]

Im sure most english guys would say that Flintoff is at the same level of Dravid and Shewag.

Flintoff same league as Dravid and Sehwag?...don't think so

 

[Zinzan]

Seriously how much blind patriotism must there be to think India are better than England?!? They drew with Pakistan, they convincingly lost to Australia, they lost in NZ and only drew at home to them, drew in England when England were far weaker than now, lost in WI. India are at best a 50/50 toss up against most teams.

They are the only team that compete's with Aussie in test matches and along with Australia have the strongest batting lineup in the world. You couldn't claim england come close to Australia with either their batting lineup or bowling lineup.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Comparing Flintoff with Sehwag/Dravid is difficult anyway, but looking at their overall contributions to the team I think you can certainly say Flintoff is in the same class - Flintoff is arguably the number one all-rounder in the World.

 

[Zinzan]

For the sake of cricket and as much as i'd like to see Australia's bubble burst, I give England no chance in the ashes.

Although England have improved a lot from the last time they played , I believe Australia have actually improved even more.......

Warne seems to be back to his best. Most who have watched him bowl recently will see he's getting the drift back he lost for a couple of years. Mcgrath looks as good as I've ever seen him and between Gillispie, Kaspa and Lee, there are some more than handy other seamers.

I predict a 4-0 result to Australia with one game being affected by rain. The only chance I give England to win a test is if they win a vital toss get much the better of conditions.

Can't see it though.

I believe this is the best Aussie side in recent years, IMO better than the 2001 model.

Although Ponting seems relaxed off the field, I think he is even more ruthless and unrelenting than Taylor and Waugh were as skippers.

Time will tell...I hope i'm wrong with all this, it would be great for cricket if England did cause an upset

 

[Zinzan]

Comparing Flintoff with Sehwag/Dravid is difficult anyway, but looking at their overall contributions to the team I think you can certainly say Flintoff is in the same class - Flintoff is arguably the number one all-rounder in the World.

Gilchrist is the number 1 allrounder in the world followed by
Jacque Kallis (i still rate his bowling as more than handy), Shaun Pollock, Flintoff.

Also note this is hardly a great era for allrounders with the likes of Cairns retiring from test cricket recently.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Gilchrist is the number 1 allrounder in the world followed by
Jacque Kallis (i still rate his bowling as more than handy), Shaun Pollock, Flintoff.

Also note this is hardly a great era for allrounders with the likes of Cairns retiring from test cricket recently.

Gilchrist is the best all-rounder of course, but if you are talking batting/bowling all-rounders its Pollock first and Flintoff second for me. Kallis bowled rubbish consistently in the SA v England series, which was the last time I saw him.

 

[kendall]

Flintoff same league as Dravid and Sehwag?...don't think so

this is a ridiculous comparison, flintoff should only be compared to allrounders, comaprimg him to dravid is just illogical

 

[honestbharani]

I want England to win. I like Vaughan's nice guy approach to cricket. A throwback to the old days. But after their performance in RSA, I am sceptical. Of course, things can change as Harmison won't be sufferin from homesickness, but we will have to wait and see.



And plz, let us reserve judgements on Eng Vs INd until the series takes place, both home and away.

 

[superkingdave]

And ENG dont perform at all IN the subcontinent and that is a huge weakness in my view..until they start winning series in the subcontinent(only two series win the subcontinent in the last 20 years), they cant lay claim to 2nd place place.
Hows that for fair dinkum ?

What's 20 years ago got to do with now?

England beat Pakistan last time they were there,
they beat SL in the same year (and lost 1-0 this year)
and India could only beat them 1-0 in the last series there, with England on top in the two drawn tests.

How is that not performing at all in the sub continent?

 

[C_C]

What's 20 years ago got to do with now?

The same thing it has gotto do with IND being 'historically shaky outside the subcontinent'.

with England on top in the two drawn tests.

On top ?
erm...hello...first drawn match....it was never heading for a decision barring an IND collapse.
IND reached 100 without no loss and Hussain got Giles to bowl a foot outside legstump...
ultimately IND were 198/3...how is that ENG on top ?

In the next drawn match, there were only two completed innings...how the feck is that 'on top' ?

 

[superkingdave]

On top ?
erm...hello...first drawn match....it was never heading for a decision barring an IND collapse.
IND reached 100 without no loss and Hussain got Giles to bowl a foot outside legstump...
ultimately IND were 198/3...how is that ENG on top ?

In the next drawn match, there were only two completed innings...how the feck is that 'on top' ?

England set India 374 to win in the second test after taking a 116 run first innings lead. I would call that being on top, India batted well for the draw.

In the third test yes there was a lot of time lost, yet England still had a 98 run first innings lead.

I'll ask again, England have won 2 of the last 4 series in the subcontinent - how is that Not performing at all?

 

[marc71178]

LOL, you have to laugh when you look at the results of the poll. Of the 13 "neutrals" to vote for Australia so far, at least six of them are Aussie supporters.

Yes, I just saw that - I note not a single Englishman there is there?

 

[marc71178]

Flintoff is arguably the number one all-rounder in the World.

I would be tempted to drop the arguably part of that.

 

[Slow Love™]

Yes, I just saw that - I note not a single Englishman there is there?

Yes, they've been very disciplined. Although I have my doubts about kendall...

 

[Blaze]

i hate people who make stupid remarks, surely it will be better for cricket if england win,

Why can't you handle the fact that I don't like English sports teams. Its just my opinion and why is it a stupid remark. I am entitiled to like who I like thankyou very much