Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 61

Thread: Why have England won only 2 out 8 test series since the Ashes win in 2005 ?

  1. #1
    International Debutant Salamuddin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Lakemba, Sydney
    Posts
    2,138

    Why have England won only 2 out 8 test series since the Ashes win in 2005 ?

    Why have England not been succesful after it looked like they had a very strong team in September 2005 ?

    Luck ? Complacency ? Injuries ? Loss of Troy Cooley ?

    Why have they failed to kick on from their successes in 2004/2005 ?
    Zinedine Zidane is the greatest footballer ever !

    Richard Dickinson - you little beauty !!!!

  2. #2
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    37,651
    Injuries.
    Quote Originally Posted by KungFu_Kallis View Post
    Peter Siddle top scores in both innings....... Matthew Wade gets out twice in one ball
    "The future light cone of the next Indian fast bowler is exactly the same as the past light cone of the previous one"
    -My beliefs summarized in words much more eloquent than I could come up with

    How the Universe came from nothing

  3. #3
    International Vice-Captain Days of Grace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Takasaki, Japan
    Posts
    4,478
    The other teams were just better sides, simple as that.

    However, I will say that the absence of Flintoff has hurt them. How many of those 8 series has he actually played in?
    Greatest Ever Test XI: JB Hobbs, L Hutton, DG Bradman (c), IVA Richards, BC Lara, GS Sobers, AC Gilchrist (wk), Imran Khan, RJ Hadlee, MD Marshall, SK Warne 12th man: M Muralitharan


    Favorite XI: WG Grace, VT Trumper, IVA Richards, DCS Compton, FMM Worrell (c), AC Gilchrist (wk), CL Cairns, SK Warne, FS Trueman, SE Bond, T Richardson 12th man: H Larwood

  4. #4
    Cricketer Of The Year wpdavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    8,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Salamuddin View Post
    Why have England not been succesful after it looked like they had a very strong team in September 2005 ?

    Luck ? Complacency ? Injuries ? Loss of Troy Cooley ?

    Why have they failed to kick on from their successes in 2004/2005 ?
    Mainly because it isn't the same side. Injuries to key players have decimated the team from 2004/2005, so you'd have to start there. You'd have to think that at full strength they'd have seen off SL in 2006 and possibly India in 2007. Maybe even won at Multan in 2005, which would have at least ensured a share of the series.

    Beyond that, not many sides win in Aus, India or SL anyway.

    Not sure how much difference Cooley would have amde tbh.


  5. #5
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by silentstriker View Post
    Injuries.
    Yuppers. Main factor, at least.

    One of the most hopelessly overplayed factors is the loss of Cooley. Sure, the man's a fantastic bowling-coach, but there's no way on Earth he'd have made Liam Plunkett, Sajid Mahmood, Stephen Harmison et al into Test-class bowlers!

    The luck and mistakes made by opposition (in many capacities - selections in South Africa and dropped catches and no-balls with Australia FOR INSTANCE) involved in the triumphs in 2004\05 and 2005 shouldn't be completely undestimated, of course. Full-strength South Africa in 2004\05 vs full-strength England would have been a very different game, as I've always said.

    But nor should the fact a few players (Flintoff more than anyone; Strauss; Hoggard and Trescothick in bit-part roles; Simon Jones sensationally for a very short time; Thorpe and Pietersen on occasions) played some fantastic cricket in that time.
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  6. #6
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by wpdavid View Post
    You'd have to think that at full strength they'd have seen off SL in 2006
    Never mind being at full-strength, all it'd have taken would've been some half-decent catching.
    and possibly India in 2007. Maybe even won at Multan in 2005, which would have at least ensured a share of the series.
    And also drawn at Lahore, hence winning it...

  7. #7
    State Captain Chubb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,866
    If England could put their full bowling attack out there might have been a difference but in all honesty I don't think they are anywhere near as good as a lot of people think, or as good as the players themselves think.
    ZIMBABWE
    Somebody has to...

  8. #8
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Think it's the journalist-entourage who're guilty far more than the players of overrating said players TBH.

  9. #9
    Cricketer Of The Year wpdavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    8,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Days of Grace View Post
    The other teams were just better sides, simple as that.

    However, I will say that the absence of Flintoff has hurt them. How many of those 8 series has he actually played in?
    He missed the two series that we won, as well as the home loss to India & the current SL series. His bowling was certainly missed against India, but I doubt whether he'd have done a lot in this series.

  10. #10
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    All Over
    Posts
    15,071
    Injuries, bad luck and reverting to the old policy of throwing enough **** players into Test cricket and hoping some will stick.

    I havent checked but Id wager money that since the end of that Ashes summer in 2005 England have used more Test players than any other nation.

    There has been little continuity and some average cricketers selected.

    EDIT- By my count 26 players in just over 2 years
    Last edited by Goughy; 19-12-2007 at 06:45 AM.
    If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there is bound to be edits

    West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma

    Happy Birthday! (easier than using Birthday threads)

    Email and MSN- Goughy at cricketmail dot net

  11. #11
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Don't forget, though, that you can only pick who's available. What would you prefer: keep selecting Liam Plunkett for Test after Test having made the initial mistake, or having found him woefully below par try James Anderson again?

    BTW, from what I can tell, this is a list of those who've played for England since November 2005: Trescothick, Strauss, Vaughan, Bell, Collingwood, Pietersen, Flintoff, Geraint Jones, Giles, Udal, Harmison, Hoggard, Plunkett, Cook, Blackwell, Panesar, Shah, Anderson, Mahmood, Lewis, Read, Prior, Sidebottom, Tremlett, Bopara, Broad.

    Now how many of these players can we really say shouldn't have been picked when they were?
    Last edited by Richard; 20-12-2007 at 04:07 AM.

  12. #12
    Cricketer Of The Year wpdavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    8,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Don't forget, though, that you can only pick who's available. What would you prefer: keep selecting Liam Plunkett for Test after Test having made the initial mistake, or having found him woefully below par try James Anderson again?

    BTW, from what I can tell, this is a list of those who've played for England since November 2005: Trescothick, Strauss, Vaughan, Bell, Collingwood, Pietersen, Flintoff, Geraint Jones, Giles, Udal, Harmison, Hoggard, Plunkett, Cook, Blackwell, Panesar, Shah, Anderson, Mahmood, Lewis, Read, Prior, Sidebottom, Bopara, Broad.

    Now how many of these players can we really say shouldn't have been picked when they were?
    Plus Tremlett gives us Goughy's figure of 26.

    The bowling's the thing, isn't it. Obviously most of them wouldn't have played if Jones, Hoggard & Harmison had stayed fit, but there hasn't been an obvious 'Plan B'. Most of the selections seemed to at least have some sort of justification at the time, but that was true in the horror days of the 80's too. Bottom line is we've seen too many. If Broad deserves to be in the squad now, why did Tremlett play instead of him against India? If Lewis wasn't deemed worthy of selection at Lord's, why did he play at Trent bridge? If Blackwell was going to play at all, why for only one test.

    Maybe part of the problem is the lack of quality reserves in the CC. In 2003 when we had similar injury problems, Fletcher was able to call up established pros like Kirtley & Bicknell to do a job. In the absence of those, we've seen Plunkett & Mahmood play years before they're ready.

  13. #13
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    All Over
    Posts
    15,071
    Yeah there is clearly a lack of a plan.

    Mahmood, Plunkett and Bopara had done nothing to earn selection.

    Udal and Blackwell were clearly situational selections but neither offered any mid-term options

    One of Tremett or Broad must be given the nod as favourite and both asked to produce in CC.

    The Lewis experiment was an embarassment. Either give the guy a run as you think he is a good bowler or dont pick him. Instead it appears he was given a nod just to appease people.

    Sidebottom offers offers nothing but mediocrity over a mid range future

    By the end of the 2005 Ashes series the Read years were over it was pointless briefly recalling him. Especially as you know many in the camp didnt want him there.

    Anderson is a way short of Test class. He may get there but has to take a bag load in CC to earn a shot.

    Basically too many marginal guys are getting chances. How many of the players mentioned above would be in the top 6 or so batsmen or bowlers in the country? Not many
    Last edited by Goughy; 19-12-2007 at 07:37 AM.

  14. #14
    Cricketer Of The Year wpdavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    8,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughy View Post
    Yeah there is clearly a lack of a plan.

    Mahmood, Plunkett and Bopara had done nothing to earn selection.

    Udal and Blackwell were clearly situational selections but neither offered any mid-term options

    One of Tremett or Broad must be given the nod as favourite and both asked to produce in CC.

    The Lewis experiment was an embarassment. Either give the guy a run as you think he is a good bowler or dont pick him. Instead it appears he was given a nod just to appease people.

    Sidebottom offers offers nothing but mediocrity over a mid range future

    By the end of the 2005 Ashes series the Read years were over it was pointless briefly recalling him. Wspecially as you know many in the camp didnt want him there.

    Anderson is a long way short of Test class. He may get there but has to take a bag load in CC to earn a shot.

    Basically to many marginal guys are getting chances. How many of the players mentioned bove would be in the top 6 or so batsmen or bowlers in the country? Not many

    There's some truth in most of that, but it leaves one unanswered question. If we shouldn't have seen any of Mahmood, Plunkett, Anderson & Sidebottom then who else was there?

  15. #15
    School Boy/Girl Captain TheEpic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Middlesbrough, England
    Posts
    191
    Injuries etc to our best players. Most importantly, Flintoff and Trescothick. If both were fully fit and available for selection, we'd be a different side.

    Loss of form, particularly for Strauss and Harmison.

    No coherent bowling attack. Without that 5 we had who worked perfectly in unison, our attack always seems unbalanced or a man short. Bowlers are forced to bowl longer and more spells to handle the workload, which makes them tired and unthreatening. This can only be down to the lack of a proper allrounder though, can't help but think if a fully fit Flintoff was in the current side the attack would look a lot more potent. Flintoff, Harmison, Sidebottom, Hoggard and Panesar looks a lot better to me.

    Its worrying though. Flintoff and Jones are never gonna be the force they were, and Trescothick maybe won't be back. Bell, Collingwood et al are capable players, but they consistently fail to make big scores at important times.

    There's just a worrying lack of world class players in the team, whereas in 2005 most of them were on top of their game.
    Ponting is made out of hay. Lolz!

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Were England lucky to win the Ashes in 2005 ? ?
    By Salamuddin in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 150
    Last Post: 10-03-2006, 04:26 AM
  2. Replies: 37
    Last Post: 13-09-2005, 04:51 AM
  3. The Ashes Series 2005
    By arijitbarman in forum General
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 29-06-2005, 08:10 AM
  4. 3 Test Ashes series??????
    By loz185 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 15-11-2002, 04:33 AM
  5. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 01-09-2002, 04:37 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •