Two cheers for the Champions Trophy?

[zaremba]

The ODI series had a bit of a dull conclusion IMO, though I'm probs just saying that because we lost. It was the Natwest Series (as opposed to Natwest Challenge, well I think I have them the right way round) that finished excitedly.

You're probably right. I remember a tie and that's it really. Whereas there's not much about the Tests that followed that I don't remember. It just goes to show that ODI cricket can be fun while it lasts but is almost always unmemorable in the long run.

 

[GIMH]

I remember hoping that I had imagined that there would be three more ODIs after the original tri-series. It was also where supersubs (remember them) and powerplays were first introduced.

 

[zaremba]

One great warm-up ODI series was the 3-match series before the 1997 Ashes. It was a new and confident England team playing aggressive cricket, and they won all 3 ODIs convincingly. My God, I was excited about the Tests after that. Then came Edgbaston - what a wonderful Test that was - before, as has been noted on another thread, the remainder of the Test series was cancelled, leaving England winning the series 1-0.

 

[GIMH]

It wasn't cancelled you moron. They played The Oval Test as well.

 

[zaremba]

You're quite right. How could I forget? A 2-0 whitewash (bluewash? We've never needed to come up with the appropriate term for some reason).

 

[Furball]

Personally I felt that the 3-match ODI series before the Ashes began was a series too far. By that stage we were all ready for the Tests to begin, even though (IIRC) the ODI series had quite an exciting conclusion.

Yeah, the 3 match series was a bit too far, but the Twenty20 international, plus the triangular series was a great build up to a great series.

Next summer, there will be little to no on-field build up, then after the Test series, 7 games that no-one will really care too much about.

 

[GIMH]

TBH the Test series will have two games that noone really cares about, once we're 3-0 u let the parades begin

 

[Richard]

One great warm-up ODI series was the 3-match series before the 1997 Ashes. It was a new and confident England team playing aggressive cricket, and they won all 3 ODIs convincingly. My God, I was excited about the Tests after that. Then came Edgbaston - what a wonderful Test that was - before, as has been noted on another thread, the remainder of the Test series was cancelled, leaving England winning the series 1-0.

It wasn't cancelled you moron. They played The Oval Test as well.

You're quite right. How could I forget? A 2-0 whitewash (bluewash? We've never needed to come up with the appropriate term for some reason).

You're forgetting the glittering performance of 2003 when Zimbabwe, newly no-longer-Test-standard, were obliterated from the scene in Nasser Hussain's last true act of wonder as England captain.

(And, TBF, the seven-out-of-seven the following year)

 

[Richard]

Personally I felt that the 3-match ODI series before the Ashes began was a series too far. By that stage we were all ready for the Tests to begin, even though (IIRC) the ODI series had quite an exciting conclusion.

The ODI series had a bit of a dull conclusion IMO, though I'm probs just saying that because we lost. It was the Natwest Series (as opposed to Natwest Challenge, well I think I have them the right way round) that finished excitedly.

For me, I felt the Bangladesh games were those which we would've been best without. I count that as a seven-match (with 1 n\r) series against Australia really, and if I could've removed one part of that summer it'd have been the England-Bangladesh ODIs (and the Australia-Bangladesh ODIs too TBH, remarkable though the Sophia Gardens game was) and not the NW Challenge.

 

[GIMH]

I think the point is that there was no need for a second series, be that through not having a tri-series to begin with or whatever. Am a fan of tri-series tbh.

 

[Furball]

Nah.

Australia getting humped in the Twenty20, humped by a couple of counties then humped by Bangladesh ranks as the funniest couple of cricketing weeks I've ever had.

 

[GIMH]

Not to mention us thumping them by 9 wickets in one of the games. Twas a strange summer in LOI.

 

[Richard]

I think the point is that there was no need for a second series, be that through not having a tri-series to begin with or whatever. Am a fan of tri-series tbh.

So am I - though not when it involves a substandard side as then it's no different to a bilateral series with games against counties thrown in, for England and the touring team.

If Bangladesh in 2005 or Zimbabwe in 2003 are the third team, I'd prefer a bilateral. If it's 3 serious ODI teams, sure, tri-series for me every time.

 

[GIMH]

Yeah, agree in general though as GF said, it was rather amusing watch the Aussies getting beat by Bangas.

 

[Richard]

Nah.

Australia getting humped in the Twenty20, humped by a couple of counties then humped by Bangladesh ranks as the funniest couple of cricketing weeks I've ever had.

Was only 1 county TBF, and that was courtesy of two established international batsmen cut from the top cloth.

The Bangladesh loss was clearly the only one which especially troubled them. The Twenty20 you could tell (Corey commented on it at the time) their overwhelming feeling was surprise at how seriously England took it; the Somerset game was, well, a warm-up and as I said it was only because of Smith and Jayasuriya that they lost.