England in Australia

Dr.Cricket said:
Sorry Sureshot, I found this amusing... :D
Would you like to take this opportunity to rephrase that?

Not taking a dig at you, just the comment. ;)


I don't think anyone could really predict what was going to happen, not neccesarily the result more of the performance. Our record before this Ashes does/did back up that comment.

Rephrase it?

No, I'll take it back though (obviously).
 
Are we being too hard on England???

Pretty much everyone is ripping England to pieces following their 5-0 Ashes defeat but are we being unreasonable?? Without doubt Australia are the greatest team around at the moment and they probably have one of the greatest teams of all time at present. I don't think anyone would do well against them right now so is it any wonder they won the Ashes? Sure England could have put up more of a fight but I don't think they deserve the response they are getting.
 
I know this doesn't belond here but Sunday Telegraph have got info on Clark getting a 500k contract (equalling Warne and overtaking Langer) assuming that he does well in this ODI series. With bonuses, sponsorship and performing in the WC could easily get him into a million dollar man.

Seems that these Ashes has made him a new man.
 
Well England are ranked seconded and to lose 5-0 is very poor indeed, they did play well at times i mean they had us 5 0r 4-80 in melbourne they got a 5-550 dec and a couple of 350's, so they did do alright but really should haveve done much better and MOST of the critisim is fair.
 
Well it seems his first test cap has made him a new man. He started off so strongly which basically guaranteed him a spot for a while.
 
Like Warne said They played quite well but when it came to important parts in the matches australia stepped up to the challenge.

England had us in trouble lots of times just couldnt finish the job.
There was always someone to step up for australia.
 
The criticism is justified. What can be summised is that Australia were far too good, and they would have won the series no matter what. However at the same time England shot themselves in the foot on too many moments and made basic errors regarding selection, captaincy etc... (they've all been done to death so I won't go in to them)

So the fact is yes Australia would have won, but a scoreline of 3-0 or 3-1 would and should have been acheivable considering some of the positions they got themselves into. Had that been the end result then England wouldn't be getting half the stick they got, but as it is they weren't good and beaten by a better side, they were poor and thrashed by a better side.
 
The criticism and headlines in England would really get to the players. Probably every area of there game (and outside the game) are under scrutiny. They don't perform in the ODI and there will surely be even more headlines, even tho' we know that England aren't the strongest ODI team.
 
He was austrslia's Simon Jones in this series, taking valuable wickets and also picking up 2-3 an innings with the odd 30 to boot.

I rate him very highly.
 
Sman-21 said:
Like Warne said They played quite well but when it came to important parts in the matches australia stepped up to the challenge.

England had us in trouble lots of times just couldnt finish the job.
There was always someone to step up for australia.
I think that's a very good analysis of the series.
 
England deserve all the critisicm they get, not one England player played well in the Ashes series, and putting Andrew Flintoff as captain was just poor coaching.
 
Panesar would have a good series had he actually been able to bowl in more than5 innings and hadn't had those crap defensive fields set for him. He would have been better off with Strauss as captain. KP had a good series whilst we still had a chance of winning the ashes
 
He got a 3 wicket innings in at least one innings every test this series, did he get the most wickets? i think he did
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top