Ashes 2006 / 2007

[Bob]

Bob = Est1892's own Lisa Simpson

Ha! You count!

Nothing is going to spoil my schadenfreude - A quote Lisa would be proud of.

[OldManRed]

Well done the Aussies, poor show from the English team.

The coach (I can't bring myself to write his ****ing name) says that the rational for Giles playing is that they want to bat down to number 8. To support that he said that Warne's batting was the reason that England didn't get a big lead in the first innings and that's why they lost!!!
PRAT

[mersey86]

Surely gross stupidity is a dismissable offence.

[OldManRed]

Surely gross stupidity is a dismissable offence.

[Red Chilli]

Fair play to Australia, that was a knockout punch in the 13th round after England had been level or slightly ahead on points.
They totally outclassed us, I'm embarrassed to be an England cricket fan today.
Feel free to rip the piss out of me for the next 2 and a half years

As for trying to disect what went wrong here, well it's obvious the blame lies with the batsmen. Collingwood is excepted not just for his first innings performance but also for the fact that he batted sensibly in the second innings without any assistance from his "team".
Cook, he's just too easy to get out, I swear he'll waft that bat outside his off stump all series.
Strauss, it's just not happening for him yet but he was unlucky and has the quality to make an impact in the remaining Tests.
Bell, inexperienced but has quality.
Pieterson: his first innings saves him from a bloody good beating after the second innings.
Flintoff- ****ing terrible with bat and captaincy
G Jones: needs replacing with Reed, simply because Reed is a winner and Jones is a faggot (mentally speaking)

With respect to the bowlers well it's a complete shambles, but they aren't at fault for this defeat. They were equally at fault for the first test though.
Giles doesn't justify his place, full stop, everyone except Fletcher knows this.
Harmisson has experience and ability when he's match fit. He needs to keep bowling ESPECIALLY at the WACA. Hoggard is consistent, we need him everytime. Anderson is still struggling and has been extremely unlucky.

So for the next Test, I'd bring back Reed and Vaughan for GJones and Cook respectively. Obviously Monty for Giles. I think I'd leave out Anderson for Plunkett or Mahmood. Both are quicker than Anderson. Mahmood has more pace and bounce so I think he'd be my first choice.

The worst thing about this morning was hearing Fletcher talking about the Monty non-selection. He keeps saying "we need to bat to 8" which makes me terrified he will pick Giles again Maybe at the expense of Anderson and not Monty but at the WACA this is another big mistake.
Fletcher has taken us as far as he can, fair play to him for winning the Ahes but time is now up for him

[mersey86]

Excellent summary Red Chilli. I do see Fletcher's point about "need to bat to 8". Can you see a tail of Hoggard, Mahmood, Harmison, Panesar doing much more than roll over to Warne? I can't. Australia are in a better position in that their 8, 9, 10 are as good as 7, 8, 8 whereas ours would be 11, 11, 11. It puts a lot of pressure on the wicket-keeper/last batsman who has nobody to hold up the other end.
I would get rid of Jones though. Every time a bit of character is needed he gets shown up.

[Red Chilli]

I've always thought Jones looks a good batsman when the scoreboard reads 370+/5. When it reads 130/5 he looks like the wrong man in the wrong place at the wrong time. Reed has earned his place and has been terribly unlucky TWICE to get dropped. I'd have him in, he has a sound technique and it a little battler. He is a very good wicket keeper but to Jones's credit he has improved this.

As for looking at the tail of Hoggard, Mahmood, Harmisson, Panesar. Well I think they'd benefit from batting with Reed also in preference to Jones, but you have to go back to what Boycott always says: If you can't get enough runs with 5 batsmen a keeper and 5 bowlers then the problem is with your batsmen.
That's a simplistic almost old-fashioned view but he's right. It's up to our 5 batsmen, Flintoff and Reed to get the runs, the bowlers are there to take the wickets. We already have a great all rounder in Flintoff giving us superb balance. OK he's struggling at the moment but I don't blame him, he's got too much on his plate and it's his first Ashes tour. If ever there was a wrong time to make him captain it was on this tour when we need him to be concentrating on being his batting/bowling best. He's not a great thinker I believe. He thinks about his bowling well but he needs a thinker like Vaughan to guide his bowling and his field placings. Vaughan is like a modern day, better batting, Mike Brearley. His genius is in his captaincy, almost worth his place for that alone, but his batting is also superb.
Anyway, back to the tail, Hoggard bats well with a good partner up the other end. One of my biggest disappointments with England is the way we often (but not in this Test) leave the tail exposed. One of our middle order players ought to protect the tail and carry his bat. This is where I think Reed would excell. Reed is also a thinker who will work out how to get the most benefit from the tail. Jones is more of a selfish stroke-maker in my book who doesn't react to pressure well.
So I'm happy with that tail, Hoggard and another will get some runs, Mahmood and Harmy will fling their bat around for a few runs and Monty's stickability with the bat is SERIOUSLY under-rated. With Reed or a batsman at the other end to protect him they could get some runs.

Basically, we shouldn't be picking our bowlers for their batting ability. Imagine if we did the same with the batsmen, picking them based on the amount of wickets they might take.

[animal magic]

I've always thought Jones looks a good batsman when the scoreboard reads 370+/5. When it reads 130/5 he looks like the wrong man in the wrong place at the wrong time. Reed has earned his place and has been terribly unlucky TWICE to get dropped. I'd have him in, he has a sound technique and it a little battler. He is a very good wicket keeper but to Jones's credit he has improved this.

As for looking at the tail of Hoggard, Mahmood, Harmisson, Panesar. Well I think they'd benefit from batting with Reed also in preference to Jones, but you have to go back to what Boycott always says: If you can't get enough runs with 5 batsmen a keeper and 5 bowlers then the problem is with your batsmen.
That's a simplistic almost old-fashioned view but he's right. It's up to our 5 batsmen, Flintoff and Reed to get the runs, the bowlers are there to take the wickets. We already have a great all rounder in Flintoff giving us superb balance. OK he's struggling at the moment but I don't blame him, he's got too much on his plate and it's his first Ashes tour. If ever there was a wrong time to make him captain it was on this tour when we need him to be concentrating on being his batting/bowling best. He's not a great thinker I believe. He thinks about his bowling well but he needs a thinker like Vaughan to guide his bowling and his field placings. Vaughan is like a modern day, better batting, Mike Brearley. His genius is in his captaincy, almost worth his place for that alone, but his batting is also superb.
Anyway, back to the tail, Hoggard bats well with a good partner up the other end. One of my biggest disappointments with England is the way we often (but not in this Test) leave the tail exposed. One of our middle order players ought to protect the tail and carry his bat. This is where I think Reed would excell. Reed is also a thinker who will work out how to get the most benefit from the tail. Jones is more of a selfish stroke-maker in my book who doesn't react to pressure well.
So I'm happy with that tail, Hoggard and another will get some runs, Mahmood and Harmy will fling their bat around for a few runs and Monty's stickability with the bat is SERIOUSLY under-rated. With Reed or a batsman at the other end to protect him they could get some runs.

Basically, we shouldn't be picking our bowlers for their batting ability. Imagine if we did the same with the batsmen, picking them based on the amount of wickets they might take.

good post giles is not good enough for test cricket any more or jones

[Red Chilli]

good post giles is not good enough for test cricket any more or jones

It's arguable whether he was ever good enough. He certainly wasn't ever good enough as a front line spinner. He has his role in certain situations and he was the best option for many years. But now there is a natural successor who has so much more ability.
A spinner who can get front line Pakistani batsmen out on an English pitch consistently is a very good spinner indeed. He simply has to play.

[animal magic]

It's arguable whether he was ever good enough. He certainly wasn't ever good enough as a front line spinner. He has his role in certain situations and he was the best option for many years. But now there is a natural successor who has so much more ability.
A spinner who can get front line Pakistani batsmen out on an English pitch consistently is a very good spinner indeed. He simply has to play.

yeah monty has to play in the next test

[animal magic]

this sums up the test for england It was too timid, too uncertain, and completely lacked character

[Red Chilli]

He has to play for the next 12 months. He's young for a spinner, spinners always take a bit of stick when they're starting out. I remember when Warne came to England first time. Before he bowled in the Tests he bowled in a 1 day match and Graeme Hick smashed him to all parts of Worcester. He absolutely battered him. But the Aussies still picked him in a Test match and his 1st ball is the stuff of legends...

Monty needs the same faith to be shown in him, as does Reed

[Red Chilli]

this sums up the test for england It was too timid, too uncertain, and completely lacked character

They choked. Only collingwood showed any character, the rest just didn't want to be out there. Some of that comes from the uncertain captain who wasn't ready for that test of character. Sad for Freddie but he's not a captain.

[animal magic]

They choked. Only collingwood showed any character, the rest just didn't want to be out there. Some of that comes from the uncertain captain who wasn't ready for that test of character. Sad for Freddie but he's not a captain.

no freddie is not a captain will vaughan play in the series collingwood has become a really good test batsmen

[Red Chilli]

I think Michael Vaughan will play at Perth
All being well. He's been based in perth for weeks now and that has always been his aim.

Collingwood's greatest asset is his determination. Australian's respect that in a player. He's not got the best technique, but he's got a good head and is very determined.