1st Test: England v Australia

I know I shouldn't be surprised there are some fools suggesting Australia axe a few players, but really what is wrong with you people? We got the slow dry pitch that was expected, a pitch that if anything was supposed to favour England's spin advantage. Australia were possibly hopeless without Lee, wrong to pick Hilfenhaus over Clark and utterly stupid to pick Hauritz. Nevertheless, they were the ones who played the better cricket. Australia narrowly ran out of time, but this game didn't even run close to the full 450 overs. If that's how well they play in conditions that ought to ensure a draw, well let's see them in conditions that do.
 
How was Bopara performing.

As for Strauss, this is the ashes, it's all about winning.

Bopara got hundreds against the West Indies. Cook got two, but one of those was when the game was as dead as could possibly be.
 
Whilst Bopara's hundreds were under intense pressure at the highest level of play international cricket had ever seen.
 
Whilst Bopara's hundreds were under intense pressure at the highest level of play international cricket had ever seen.
No, but they were match winning. The West Indies are a lot better than they get credit for.
 
Let's just play Marcus Trescothick for one last hurrah...

evertonfan added 0 Minutes and 46 Seconds later...

No, but they were match winning. The West Indies are a lot better than they get credit for.

Lee are you on the bush tonight? They literally couldn't care any less for Test cricket. It's only us who make them look anything better than completley average in the longer form of the game.
 
Well if they are so good then Cooks career best score against them last series is worth him having a fair chance in the side then.
 
To all Indian fan - this is why the ashes pawns any rivalry you have.

There's nothing particularly unique or remarkable about watching a team barely limp to an undeserved draw. I'll take our rivalry with Pakistan.
 
There's nothing particularly unique or remarkable about watching a team barely limp to an undeserved draw. I'll take our rivalry with Pakistan.

A rivalry which will never, ever have the slightest chance of being able to even be talked about in the same paragraph as the Ashes.
 
There's nothing particularly unique or remarkable about watching a team barely limp to an undeserved draw. I'll take our rivalry with Pakistan.



Both are epic rivalry, but Ashes has a bigger history than India vs Pak .
 
I didn't think there was a worse side at bowling out tailenders than England. I was wrong...
 
A rivalry which will never, ever have the slightest chance of being able to even be talked about in the same paragraph as the Ashes.

The Ashes are the pinnacle of cricket. More than the World Cup, more than any other nation. Every sport has its main event and for cricket it is the Ashes.
 
A rivalry which will never, ever have the slightest chance of being able to even be talked about in the same paragraph as the Ashes.

Maybe in England and Australia. Sorry to crash your party but the world doesn't revolve around England or Australia.
 
There's nothing particularly unique or remarkable about watching a team barely limp to an undeserved draw. I'll take our rivalry with Pakistan.

Lords 2008 England vs India?
Lords 2007 England vs Pakistan?
Lords 2006 England vs Sri Lanka?

A draw's a draw. Maybe it wasn't deserved but it's not as if it doesn't happen to everyone.

Will_NA added 1 Minutes and 8 Seconds later...

There seems to be a lot of interest from non-English/Australian members for a series not of much importance.
 
Last edited:
The Ashes are the pinnacle of cricket. More than the World Cup, more than any other nation. Every sport has its main event and for cricket it is the Ashes.


Absolutely, Ashes is important even than world cup. Becasue Ashes has some history where world cup has nothing. Just fighting for the top spot.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top