The Ashes 2009

Gr8 that we didn't lose. However lets not smokescreen this. There were no heroes. How we managed to get in this position is unacceptable. It was a flat track!! We won the toss n still end up in this position?? The batsmen were poor n I believe changes need to be made. Australia credit where it's due even tho we almost handed it to them.

I hope the lads take this as a serious warning that we haven't won the series yet. What concerns me is we played 5 bowlers n took 6 wickets. Collingwoods a lucky bloke cos if we lost that shot he played was diabolical.

I agree sidebottom in for panesar, sidebottoms been treated like crap as well but at least he can be economical and probe the batsmen. Lords will be flat again me thinks, so barring a repeat of this rubbish we prouced we can go to edgbaston n knock em over again like last time.

Also agree wit ponting over appealing but us time wasting wasn't cool either, 2005 was how cricket shud b played I hope the current crop dnt ruin it.

Finally thank god for monty and jimmy, the batters might wanna take note!!

The top order played some bad shots, I think a change of mentality is what's required. I still believe that we're a better side than australia, they just seemed more up for it than us. Hopefully the way the tail saved it for us will fire the team up for the rest of the series. B.T.W i've got a lot of sympathy for the way Collingwood got out, it's never easy batting with the lower order, trying to farm the strike.

654321 Wrote:Gr8 that we didn't lose. However lets not smokescreen this. There were no heroes.

for me monty and jimmy were heroes and paul is now god

monty and jimmy bowl for two days and then cone in and batt that long
incredible

alought i agree they played very poorly the name of the game is to take 20 wickets and score more runs
weed have lost this test if warne and magrath were playing but im talking about two of the greatest bowlers ever .so they cant rely on there wickets no more

england were poor but they showe some steeland resolve to get the draw work and change needed they done good

654321 i cant believe your having a go at colly, he batted nearly 6 hours, he is the reason we drew the game.Harmison should be in for lords to add variety to the attack, onions would be a waste of time, sidebottom would also add a bit of variety with his left arm but im not sure how well he is bowling for notts at the moment

samcook89 Wrote:The top order played some bad shots, I think a change of mentality is what's required. I still believe that we're a better side than australia, they just seemed more up for it than us. Hopefully the way the tail saved it for us will fire the team up for the rest of the series. B.T.W i've got a lot of sympathy for the way Collingwood got out, it's never easy batting with the lower order, trying to farm the strike.

The thing is if they can be as up for it as Australia then they might as well retire. This is the pinnacle of test cricket for England and Australia, if u cnt motivate urself for this, then u got issues.

Don't get me wrong i aint knockin colly, but i'm just saying look at where that ball was, he didn't need to play it, having said that, sum1 might want to tell Kevin Pieterson that he walked out with a bat, so its generally wise to use the bloody thing!!

The only positive from this debacle was the lower order resistance. Its embarrassing that the lower order spent more time at the crease than the top order. The problem is the batting line up is too comfortable. But the bowlers didnt help themselves with their timid display with the ball. All in all, a lot to be learned from this match, i hope the coaching team learn from the mistakes and move forward, hopefully win the toss at Lords and pile on the runs and put the Aussies under pressure.

I think that this result against australia was avery good result in more ways than one

1) To play badly agaisnt arguably the best side in test cricket and grind out a result is a sign of a good side. There is no top class side ever who have not had to grind out a result and rely on lady luck to play a blinder. Look at football are you going to tell me Man Utd Arsenal Chelsea, liverpool never got a result when they have been played off the park in the premier league?
Look at Australia In the third test 2005 series , they got a very lucky draw yet the feeling was my god we could pay for not putting them away when we had them on the ropes , rather than these boys are there for the taking.
2) to play well below your best and still get a result gives you confidence, in the sense that you can still be hard to beat when you put in a particularly poor one off performance. England will never perform as poorly as that again this series(i hope)
3) england were over confident going into it knowing that in 2005 they beat the team which had all the legends in it, going by theory this team should be a lot lesser challenge , But have now realised that any one representing Australia is going to be more than a match for his english counter part. England have got a kick in the arse they needed and still have not paid the price for it(if England were offered a draw before this match started I would bet big money they would have taken It)
4) England have got a stronger insight into the Australian teams individuals in terms of strength and weaknesses and capabilities, and yet are still on level terms.

To sum up we have been given a bloody good lesson of what is needed to beat this australian team and yet go into the next match level. When you are defeated you come back with all the ingredients needed for a better next performance; Knowledge, humility and an overpowering desire to do yourself justice. England will have these ingredients going into the next match yet are still on level terms.

'I hope the lads take this as a serious warning that we haven't won the series yet. What concerns me is we played 5 bowlers n took 6 wickets. Collingwoods a lucky bloke cos if we lost that shot he played was diabolical'

I feel that this was harsh Collingwood was trying to make sure that England would make Australia bat again (7 runs were needed) the fielders were in for the catch,the ball was there to be hit, and collingwood was trying to hit over the top a shot a player of his caliber could execute 8/9 times out of 10. He miscued it and Hussy was very lucky to catch it. It ws the right shot in terms of percentage it was just a mishit, so therefore I feel it would be very hard to condemn Collingwood for the shot. It was just a bad shot but not a stupid or reckless one.

Another point I would like to make is the hypocrisy of Ricky Ponting claiming that England used gamesmanship in getting the reserve fielder and physio on to waste time. What is appealing when you know the batsmens not out? on at least 3or4 occassions in the last wicket stand that is exactly what he, Hauritz ,Haddin and Siddell were guilty of and then trying to intimadate the umpires when they did not get the decision . If we behaved like him we would be called typical F******g whingeing poms.


Absolute double standards.

i love bob willis someing up cloingwood in the post match review

"he deserves an mbe for the way hes played today , he got 1 a while back for doing nothing , at least hed have deserved this 1"

just thought it was brilliant

Shane Warne is joining the sky team for the Lords test and anon. I think that will be a brilliant signing He really does have a great cricket brain. It is also quit interesting to know that in theory he could bowl for us in this ashes series I really do belive that if we had him bowling for us in the all the other ashes series the results would have been vastly different.

Anyway fantasy aside this is his verdict on the upcoming test
'Australia dont have any reason to make changes for Lords, but England will look at their bowling attack. I think Adil Rashid is ready for test cricket. They need a bit of variety among the pace bowlers. Maybe Ryan Sidebottom, Stephen Harmison, James Anderson and Andrew Flintoff would be the best combination'[/b]
As a fellow former leg spinner as far as I am concerned what Warne says is law, and England could do a lot worse then picking that team.

setter1000 Wrote:I think that this result against australia was avery good result in more ways than one

1) To play badly agaisnt arguably the best side in test cricket and grind out a result is a sign of a good side. There is no top class side ever who have not had to grind out a result and rely on lady luck to play a blinder. Look at football are you going to tell me Man Utd Arsenal Chelsea, liverpool never got a result when they have been played off the park in the premier league?
Look at Australia In the third test 2005 series , they got a very lucky draw yet the feeling was my god we could pay for not putting them away when we had them on the ropes , rather than these boys are there for the taking.

I have to say I thought we were awful, and I hate to put a dampener on things, but many of the points you've made can switched the other way.

I mean you say, to save a match like that is the sign of a good side. Where is that sign? None of our batsman could score a 100, looked mentally fragile, and our bowlers wee toothless. It felt like Australia could have easily scored over a 1000 runs if they wanted to and if it wasn't for the weather we'd have lost this 1st test. Also the comparisons between our draw and the draw in 2005 isn't very accurate, Australia were easily the best side in the world in 2005, so the England side were naturally disappointed to only draw. Of course the aussies will be disappointed to only draw this game, but they know they're better then England, the rankings say so, they recently won a test series in South Africa whereas we recently lost one away to the West Indies.

setter1000 Wrote:2) to play well below your best and still get a result gives you confidence, in the sense that you can still be hard to beat when you put in a particularly poor one off performance. England will never perform as poorly as that again this series(i hope

You'd like to think England will never perform that badly again but this is England you're talking about. You can switch it another way and say the Aussies will be confident knowing how badly England's record is at Lords (where the next test is to be played), they haven't beaten the Aussies there since 1934, the Aussies know they outplayed England, England haven't won their last 6 tests against Australia, being outplayed in all of them.

setter1000 Wrote:3) england were over confident going into it knowing that in 2005 they beat the team which had all the legends in it, going by theory this team should be a lot lesser challenge , But have now realised that any one representing Australia is going to be more than a match for his english counter part. England have got a kick in the arse they needed and still have not paid the price for it(if England were offered a draw before this match started I would bet big money they would have taken It)

It's true this Aussie side is weaker then the 2005 team, however so is this current England team. The England team in 2005 had won something like 6 series in a row before going into the ashes, their bowling attack was on fire, they outbowled Australia in that series. They don't have that now, this England bowling unit is average, and to take 20 wickets against any Australian batting line up you need a strong bowling attack, which is why I can't see England winning this series because although Australia's bowlers aren't really any better, their batsman seem to be able to get the big scores and handle the pressure better then England's batsman. Only KP would get into the Australian top 6, and he's trying to slog sweep eveything like a lunatic.

Also, I think it's pathetic if it took the England cricketers to nearly lose a match before they got a kick up the ass. They should know already that trying to beat Australia at test cricket is like trying to beat Brazil at football, they're always going to be hard to beat, so no excuse really.

setter1000 Wrote:4) England have got a stronger insight into the Australian teams individuals in terms of strength and weaknesses and capabilities, and yet are still on level terms.

Yes, but is this England side good enough to take advantage of any perceived weakness? Because the Aussie batsman looked rock solid. I just can't see England bowling this Australian side out, and Harmison probably coming back sums up how weak our bowling attack is at the moment.