The Bigger Ashes Achievement for England?

[Black_Warrior]

As England mark their 1000th Test match, we know all that matters is the Ashes.

So what was in your view the greater Ashes achievement of this decade?

2005 Ashes win - after losing 8 Ashes series on the trot (home and away), this was an incredible win against the Invincible Australian side.
The quality of cricket itself was of the highest quality and is remembered most fondly by England fans. A lot of matches would be considered classics in the nail biting tradition.

For the first time, a side other than Pakistan relied so heavily on reverse swing and did it so successfully. Flintoff and Jones emerged and skilled bowlers with the old ball. Harmison drew first blood with his fiery spell in the 1st Test. Pietersen took on Australian bowlers in a way few English batsmen dared to in the last 20 years.

or

2010 Ashes win - The only away win for England since 1990. Yes the Australian team might not be the Invincible side but here are a few points that make this so special

1) Australia were still an extremely strong side, ranked among the top 3 sides in the world and had lost only 1 home series since 1986.

2) This series is sandwiched between two utterly humiliating 5-0 whitewashes of 2006 and 2013. What's absolutely incredible about this win is an important point demonstrated in every other Ashes series in Australia - while both teams struggle to win their away Ashes series and suffer humiliating defeats, Australia still manage to win a Test or 2 in England (2005, 2009, 2015). When England go to Australia, they don't even come close to winning a Test match, forget about a series.

So a 3-1 series win in Australia, which basically paved the way for England's greatest Test side to emerge. Anderson gained respect as a swing bowler outside of England, Trott and Cook established themselves as two of England's finest batsmen, Strauss will go down as one of England's greatest captaincy mainly because of this series, not to mention contributions of KP, Prior, Bell, Tremlett, Bresnan, Swann. Every English cricketer made a meaningful contribution and that's why England went on to become number 1 Test side in 2011-12.


Which series is the bigger win considering all these factors?

 

[Burgey]

2010 imo. 2005 will always be tainted by their cheating.

 

[Starfighter]

Hmm. 2010 was the first series that I ever really followed so I'm a little biased. But while England did achieve a narrow victory against a great team in 2005, but missing one of its most important members, to come down under and not only win but look very dominant for a large part of the series, although against a mediocre team, (and in the wettest, most English year since 1974) was a really major achievement, especially since they took a nearly identical team down only three years later and had the crap belted out of them.

 

[Burgey]

I think they won their three tests all by an innings. Was a dominant performance tstl.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

The 2010-11 Ashes would have been much better for Australia if they had of given Mark Cameron a game.

Okay, probably not, the batting was still completely dire. But it is a shame we never got to see what Cameron could offer in Test cricket.

 

[TheJediBrah]

So, are you Mark Cameron?

 

[flibbertyjibber]

2005 was a bigger achievement as they beat a top side. The 2010/11 one was a shambles that were there for the taking.

 

[Borges]

2005 was a bigger achievement as they beat a top side. The 2010/11 one was a shambles that were there for the taking.

Also, because the 2005 victory gave them a huge opportunity to increase the audience for cricket in England.
Had they seized the moment then, they wouldn't have needed these Honk Kong style gimmicks that they are planning now.

 

[FBU]

Never forgotten the 517/1d

 

[Daemon]

13/14 was the best by far

 

[ImpatientLime]

2010

i don't care how much it rained, even south africa for all their brilliance in australia over the past decade or so haven't slapped australia as comprehensively as england did in that series.

the gulf in class was big and that pace attack eclipses the 2005 vintage.

 

[vcs]

I'm conflicted. I wish Australia had not been so pathetic in that 2010 series. England just walked all over them on that tour. As good as they were, I just can't rate it as a better achievement than beating that ATG 2005 side, which showed immense resistance even when they were being outplayed for the majority of the time.

 

[Black_Warrior]

I'm conflicted. I wish Australia had not been so pathetic in that 2010 series. England just walked all over them on that tour. As good as they were, I just can't rate it as a better achievement than beating that ATG 2005 side, which showed immense resistance even when they were being outplayed for the majority of the time.

2005 was a bigger achievement as they beat a top side. The 2010/11 one was a shambles that were there for the taking.

Here's the thing though..was the side really in shambles? Yes they were poor in that particular series but how much of that was because how well prepared and strong England were? That side still were unbeaten against everyone (except South Africa). The same side played well in the previous Ashes in England (2009) and the series was decided in the final test thanks to a Jonathan Trott masterclass.

 

[vcs]

They were crap.

Apart from the random Johnson spell in Perth (and Harris), they barely hit the same spot on the pitch twice in a row all series.

 

[Slifer]

2010 imo. 2005 will always be tainted by their cheating.

How did they cheat?? Anyway, 2005 for me. Eng actually beat an atg team which was very very rare at the time.

 

[Black_Warrior]

I'm not saying the performance wasn't crap. You lose 3 games by an innings at home is crap. I'm asking whether they were a crap side though? On paper.

 

[Black_Warrior]

How did they cheat?? Anyway, 2005 for me. Eng actually beat an atg team which was very very rare at the time.

You took the bait. tsk tsk

 

[fredfertang]

It never occurred to me that I'd see a better series than 1981, but 2005 was in another dimension - 2010 was great, watching England hammer Australia for once, but as a spectacle it had nothing on 2005

 

[Red]

2005 was gladiatorial stuff. What an epic series. First time we'd seen the Australian team intimidated since the early 90s, and the first time I'd ever seen an English team able to intimidate. So many points:

- Flintoff, Jones, Harmison and Hoggard all bowled so well as a unit.
- The coming of Pietersen and the power hitting of him and Flintoff which must have showed the Australians what it'd been like to have to confront someone like Gilchrist in the opposition. There was some big hitting.
- The lack of batting firepower from a declining Gilly, Hayden, Martyn and sub par returns from Clarke and Ponting (in spite of Ponting's one epic knock).
- Lee's was ok (just) but it was the beginning of the end for Dizzy, who'd been so good for a long time.
- The Ponting run out
- McGrath missing two tests (literally would have changed the series result)
- The absolute immenseness of Warne as a cricketer.
- Solid opening combo from Strauss and Trescothick
- Good leadership from Vaughan

So close too.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Here's the thing though..was the side really in shambles? Yes they were poor in that particular series but how much of that was because how well prepared and strong England were? That side still were unbeaten against everyone (except South Africa). The same side played well in the previous Ashes in England (2009) and the series was decided in the final test thanks to a Jonathan Trott masterclass.

Absolutely yes