Question about the Ashes?

[Mard]

This is a chart of the all matches played between Australia and England up until 2005


My question is, was there a time when England were ahead in the lead in Ashes?

[Richard]

Yes. Before WWI, Australia only very rarely won an Ashes series. From 22 series between 1882/83 and 1912, England won 15. And 4 of these 7 Australian victories came in a row between 1897/98 and 1902.

[Richard]

From WWI (the first post-WWI series was played in 1920/21) onwards, Australia have won 23, England 13. 2 of these 13 were not worth a thing - 1932/33 because illicit tactics were used, and 1978/79 because England were Packer-depleted and Australia Packer-gutted. There are, however, admittedly 3 of Australia's victories which were similarly hollow, 1920/21, 1921 and 1946/47, as England's side had been decimated by first WWI then WWII.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by Richard

From WWI (the first post-WWI series was played in 1920/21) onwards, Australia have won 23, England 13. 2 of these 13 were not worth a thing - 1932/33 because illicit tactics were used, and 1978/79 because England were Packer-depleted and Australia Packer-gutted. There are, however, admittedly 3 of Australia's victories which were similarly hollow, 1920/21, 1921 and 1946/47, as England's side had been decimated by first WWI then WWII.

Australian forces suffered a higher rate of casualties in WWI than any other British Empire force. They were decimated equally, if not more, than England were in terms of the number of men killed or wounded as a percentage of the population. Whilst it must be so that England lost more men in raw numbers than Australia did, it remains the case that Australians were slaughtered at a greater rate than even the English were.

Certainly different to WW2 where England suffered much worse in terms of casualty rates. In relation to WW2 I think you're being a bit kind - I'd add 1948 to the list as well. Sure it was a great side, but IIRC England was still under food rationing at the time - I think the Australian side even brough food parcels over with them.

[Richard]

As a percentage of the population, sure, but I'm pretty sure far more English top-level cricketers were lost than Australian ones.

As regards 1948, yeah, the country was very much still recovering, but in Hutton, Washbrook, Edrich, Compton, Yardley, Evans, Bedser and Laker England's side was very, very far from poor.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by Richard

As a percentage of the population, sure, but I'm pretty sure far more English top-level cricketers were lost than Australian ones.

As regards 1948, yeah, the country was very much still recovering, but in Hutton, Washbrook, Edrich, Compton, Yardley, Evans, Bedser and Laker England's side was very, very far from poor.

Yep. Still think England dropping Hutton for one of those tests remains, despite some of the other selections of more recent decades, arguably the worst mistake by England selectors.

[SJS]

Originally Posted by Mard

This is a chart of the all matches played between Australia and England up until 2005


My question is, was there a time when England were ahead in the lead in Ashes?

To answer that simple question, .....
.....YES in the 35 year period between 1886 and 1921, England were continuously ahead of Australia in a head-to-head Test wins coumt.
England went ahead (11 tests to 9) when they won the 1886 series 3-0 and then stayed ahead till 1920-21 when Australia beat them 5-0 to draw level in the head to head after 34 years at 40 Tests each.

Australia won the next series in 1921 3-0 and went ahead and have never been behind England since then.

England did catch up to be level once (51 Tests each) after winning the 32-33 bodyline series.

England's best period by far was from the 1886 series at home till the 1896 series (again at home) during which period they won 10 of the 11 Ashes series and won 21 Tests whiloe losing just 8.