Of course we're on the up. After the 05 Ashes we were actually on the way down (not that we knew that for a little while).
How where we on the way down after the 05 Ashes??. We had everything in place. Only thing that crippled us was the injuries to Jones, FLintoff & Vaughan, plus Trescothicks unfortuante mental woes.
If over the past 4 years we had all of them fit, ENG would have had FAR better results & the team today probably would have bee:
Trescothick
Strauss (c)
Trott
KP
Collingwood
Prior
Flintoff
Broad
Swann
Jones
Anderson
Now that would be have been up with AUS/SA/IND for sure.
Only Problem then now would be that Collingwood in test you always feel he is one failure from getting drop if he comes up againts a quality pace attack. Thus Morgan would be the next bestman in line.
At the start of this year we were in disarray. Now, we have a captain who scores for fun (when was the last time we could say that by the way?),
Trott looks promising and if Cook and Pietersen can rediscover the form then we have a good batting line-up.
KP of course. But i can't see how you can have much confidence in Cook, he has the same technical flaws from since Ashes 06/07. He like Collingwood is just a series away from being dropped. If Trescothick didn't have his mental woes, Cook would have been dropepd a long time ago.
As for the bowling, Broad & Onions both showed some impressive form in the Ashes, Anderson trailed off at the end of the summer but is still improving and Swann looks good so far. We really don't have problems in the bowling and I'd go as far to say I feel better about our Test side than I have for about three years or so.
- Anderson he is getting better all the time yes. Expect him to become the new Hoggard very soon. The defacto leader of the attack. But ATM Anderson a bit like the West Indies having Vanburn Holder leading the attack in the ealry 70s after Hall/Griffith left & before the 4-prong arrives. Thats the position ENG are in right now.
- Swann. Solid operator, he is better than what AUS have ATM. So thats good enough ha.
- Broad, improving. Long may it continue, by no means a world beater or anything
- The jury is still out on Onions. He would probably be good in English conditions not sure about his effect on flat decks.
- Sidebottom seems to be pass his peak. No sure how much longer he will last. But he should play in SA
Then we have as backup to them Bresnan, Plunkett, Harmo (maybe) & god forbin Davies. Thats not quality depth.
Overall none of the main group of fast bowlers can be considered WC, just that Anderson is solid operator & have a real determined spinner in Swann. Plus no good exciting young fast bowlers around. I dont see how this makes you confident from a year ago.
The only thing new & exciting from one year ago is the emergence of Morgan.
But of course, we're not on the up, the fact that we managed to win a series despite being so far behind statistically isn't the sign of a resilient side at all. No, I'd much rather a complacent team that crumbles chasing less than 200 when supposed to be the second best in the world.
So if ENG lose in SA now (which is very likely to happen regardless of the Ashes win & SA bowling attack lacking a bit of sting). What are you going to say then?
No offence aussie, but you live in your own world. Nobody is getting carried away, but to say things aren't on the up for England given where we have come from is quite simply ridiculous. FACT!!!!
As i showed above, compared to situation the teamw as post 2005 Ashes, we clearly are not on the way up with so much question marks over many players & a bowling attack just losing out only WC bowler.
ENG are in a delicate balance ATM, drawing or winning in SA with some of the bowlers stepping up would signal something very good after winning the Ashes. But losing in SA & its back to square one (PAK 2005 to WI 2009) & it would pretty much prove winning the Ashes was a fluke.
While AUS definately have a team that they are building on despite the Ashes. Quality depth in all area's (except spin of course).
Flem274 said:
**Yawn*
Its like talking to a brick wall with some tagging on it.
There are no flukes, especially over five tests. Deal with it.
Doesn't happen often but they have been a few series in cricket history, where the inferior team over a 5 test (or 4 test which is long enough as well) have come out top due to lucky circumstance. But beating the superior team like what ENG did in the Ashes, didn't signal the beginning of any revival.
- See Ind vs WI 2002 (in West Indies)
- SA vs AUS 52/53 (in AUS)
- NZ vs SA 61/62
- IND vs AUS 03/04 (fluke in the sense that they where lucky McGrath/Warne didn't play & Dizzy was playing injured, thus the strong IND batting took advantage of weakened AUS attack & the series was closer than it should have been)
- WI vs AUS 99 (WI as team didn't play great cricket, it was Lara vs AUS. Aus where clearly the superior team). WI still remained crapped.
- ENG vs SA 98 (Eng dont know how they what the series, SA where clearly the superior team & made a few mistakes a crucial points like AUS did in this years Ashes). Eng still remained crap.
