The Ashes 2010/11
- Thread starter Stann
- Start date
- Replies 916
- Views 44K
Have to say Aussies are really unlucky that MacGill played at the same time as Warne. His chances were so limited coz of Warne. If they had someone like MacGill, he would have played each and every game. But its always nice to see Aussies struggling. England are just good at all departments, just that they should make sure complacent doesn't creep in. They should attack in the same way they did in the second test.
It would be great for England cricket team to win(Retain) Ashes in Aussies den after 18 years without Ashes victory.
It would be great for England cricket team to win(Retain) Ashes in Aussies den after 18 years without Ashes victory.
I honestly think we will retain,, i think we should be targeting as Prior said, going the whole tour unbeaten...
Thats very much possible as Aussie bowling attack look toothless and we can sense the panic in Aussie camp. I have always said Johnson is just overrated lucky bowler, I'm glad he is proving it.
Johnson out, bollinger in. After second test, Bollinger out, Johnson in. They just dont know what is their best combination.
Ye Prior is right! and Swanny just after the game was given the option of just winning the ashes, becoming the best team in the world or annihilating the aussies... which did he pick
we need to really rub salt in those wounds that haven't existed for so long!!
i think they may perform ok in one of the remaining tests so i will predict 3-0
Yeah Bollinger is a great bowler as well, His first test back from Injury, and Suddenly he is then Discarded, Joke.
Ye Prior is right! and Swanny just after the game was given the option of just winning the ashes, becoming the best team in the world or annihilating the aussies... which did he pick
we need to really rub salt in those wounds that haven't existed for so long!!
i think they may perform ok in one of the remaining tests so i will predict 3-0
I put a bet on 2-0 at the start of the series, and still believe we will get it.
So can we come to the conclusion that we started the move and you are finishing it off.
Thefreeman
Member
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2009
- Messages
- 113
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Stocking up on Red Bull is needed. Also plenty of sacks, crips and the odd takeaway is needed.
So can we come to the conclusion that we started the move and you are finishing it off.
Pretty much, I am awesome.
I'm going to drop my two pence into the argument that has rather been and gone, but I found it interesting so I'm commenting. For starters, I (shock horror) agree with Scott. Hauritz is their most experienced spinner, probably their best spinner, and performed reasonably well all things considered in the last Ashes.
Considering part-timers only is utter suicide. North's bowling isn't good enough to keep him in the team with his mediocre talent. White is a buffet bowler, same for Clarke, and Katich is injured (Clarke is a bit too, come to think of it.)
Krejza FC Avg: 47. So you're wrong there. Also, Test Avg: 43.
McGain FC Avg: 35. So, lower than his age. He's 38 and has never played a test.
Smith FC Avg: 44. Wrong again.
O'Keefe FC Avg: 24. The only one you could possibly make a case for. However, has only played 10 FC matches and no Tests. Which would make the inclusion of...
Nathan Hauritz FC Avg: 42, TEST Avg: 33. Sixty-six FC matches, seventeen Test matches, the only one out of all these bowlers to even get near decent in the Test arena. He's without a doubt their best pick for spinner.
Early on in his career, Anderson was devastating, but his action could have potentially led to future injury. Coaches saw this and remodeled his technique, changing it. He was less effective as a whole. Now, however, he's retained some aspects but largely gone back to his old technique, making him a more potent bowler.
Of course, you're right as well. He has improved a lot as a bowler too. However, this Aussie batting line-up is absolutely atrocious compared to the days of Langer and so forth.
What, and Krezja is? See earlier in my post for why I disagree.
No, but just about every other semi-decent Aussie spinner (be it a leggie or not) has been touted "the next Shane Warne". Steven Smith, for example.
There's a difference. Finn obviously has lots of talent, recognised by the England team. He's young, but only 20 games short of Mitchell Johnson's First-Class amount of games played, and Johnson is 8 years older than him. So he's experienced, talented, and young. The spinners Australia have at their disposal are either too old (McGain) inexperienced (Smith, O'Keefe) or mediocre (Krezja, Hauritz). This is why they are nothing like Finn. If they were any good, they'd have been playing Tests regularly.
Smith is the best example. If he was quality, surely he'd have deposed a relatively rubbish Hauritz as Australia's prime spinner by now, in the same way Finn has forced his way into the England setup? They're of a similar age. Finn was recognised and blended into the England setup after lots of FC experience. This cannot be said for any of the Aussies. Whether this is just bad judgement by the selectors (unlikely) or just them being a bit rubbish, it's hard to tell.
Considering part-timers only is utter suicide. North's bowling isn't good enough to keep him in the team with his mediocre talent. White is a buffet bowler, same for Clarke, and Katich is injured (Clarke is a bit too, come to think of it.)
Krejza FC Avg: 47. So you're wrong there. Also, Test Avg: 43.
McGain FC Avg: 35. So, lower than his age. He's 38 and has never played a test.
Smith FC Avg: 44. Wrong again.
O'Keefe FC Avg: 24. The only one you could possibly make a case for. However, has only played 10 FC matches and no Tests. Which would make the inclusion of...
Nathan Hauritz FC Avg: 42, TEST Avg: 33. Sixty-six FC matches, seventeen Test matches, the only one out of all these bowlers to even get near decent in the Test arena. He's without a doubt their best pick for spinner.
Early on in his career, Anderson was devastating, but his action could have potentially led to future injury. Coaches saw this and remodeled his technique, changing it. He was less effective as a whole. Now, however, he's retained some aspects but largely gone back to his old technique, making him a more potent bowler.
Of course, you're right as well. He has improved a lot as a bowler too. However, this Aussie batting line-up is absolutely atrocious compared to the days of Langer and so forth.
What, and Krezja is? See earlier in my post for why I disagree.
No, but just about every other semi-decent Aussie spinner (be it a leggie or not) has been touted "the next Shane Warne". Steven Smith, for example.
There's a difference. Finn obviously has lots of talent, recognised by the England team. He's young, but only 20 games short of Mitchell Johnson's First-Class amount of games played, and Johnson is 8 years older than him. So he's experienced, talented, and young. The spinners Australia have at their disposal are either too old (McGain) inexperienced (Smith, O'Keefe) or mediocre (Krezja, Hauritz). This is why they are nothing like Finn. If they were any good, they'd have been playing Tests regularly.
Smith is the best example. If he was quality, surely he'd have deposed a relatively rubbish Hauritz as Australia's prime spinner by now, in the same way Finn has forced his way into the England setup? They're of a similar age. Finn was recognised and blended into the England setup after lots of FC experience. This cannot be said for any of the Aussies. Whether this is just bad judgement by the selectors (unlikely) or just them being a bit rubbish, it's hard to tell.
I think that's a LITTLE harsh. He's a good player, but his mind is wrong and his technique is all over the place. He had a purple patch which has now passed, and is struggling to live up to expectations as the great Aussie strike bowler, leader of the attack. Not fit to polish McGrath's boots of course, but then again few are.
How do you like them apples
totally agree with everything you have said mate...
but as we all know, talk is cheap, we will just have to wait and see how many our boys slog the Aussie's for in 14 hours time
I'm going for 450+ dec.
Well Scott has livene things up ahead of the Ashes, read my sig for the excerpts of my conversation with him
Background info: He was supposed to be called up for the Ashes but since he was so good, the ICC had no choice but to ban him to maintain a level playing field
Background info: He was supposed to be called up for the Ashes but since he was so good, the ICC had no choice but to ban him to maintain a level playing field
I'm going for 450+ dec.
I think if we win the toss we will bat and we will pass 500 with only about 5 wickets gone,
i think if they win the toss they will bat and get about 300-350,
If we win the toss and bat, and bat like we have done, its another win without doubt. The Aussie's will have to rely on winning the toss and pulling something out of nowhere batting wise to keep up.
You are talking as if Australia are a sub-standard team, mate they are the best team in the world in my eyes and they will bounce back strongly and take us by suprise, which they always do unless Scott plays
Stann
please stay StevieP! <3
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2009
- Messages
- 1,921
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
They are categorically NOT the best team in the world anymore. Whatever rankings say I'm unsure, but no chance, India, England and SA are well ahead atm.You are talking as if Australia are a sub-standard team, mate they are the best team in the world in my eyes and they will bounce back strongly and take us by suprise, which they always do unless Scott plays
They are far from being the best "Test" side in the world!
http://icc-cricket.yahoo.net/match_zone/team_ranking.php
They are "somehow" top of the ODI rankings, but that wont last long come the world cup.
EDIT: In fact they are nearly smack bang in the middle, labeling them significantly AVERAGE!
And that was last updated on the 5th of December, Im not sure if a test match makes a difference or whether you have to wait for the test series result, but they have had a loss since then.
http://icc-cricket.yahoo.net/match_zone/team_ranking.php
They are "somehow" top of the ODI rankings, but that wont last long come the world cup.
EDIT: In fact they are nearly smack bang in the middle, labeling them significantly AVERAGE!
And that was last updated on the 5th of December, Im not sure if a test match makes a difference or whether you have to wait for the test series result, but they have had a loss since then.
Mate, trust me when I say this, they will bounce back from this defeat and show us why they are Australia
lol so since Arsenal have not won a trphy for the last 5 years they are Average, Wayne Rooney has not scored so he is average, Rankings only deduce a side's current form,
Form is Temporary, Class is Permanent
Which is interesting 'cause past Ponting they have no top-quality class. Clarke is good, Katich is good, Johnson if he is on form is good, Haddin and Hussey are both good. Past that, Ponting is top-quality, and the rest of them are mediocre at best.