View Full Version : Won't it be ironic if...
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
14 Dec 2006, 19:20
England lose the ashes after holding them for approximately 16 months after a 16 year drought.
The way they celebrated after 2005 suggested that they would not hold onto them for very long.
Also, the amount of publications that came out of the series was a joke, especially Duncan Fletcher's book which seemed nothing more then a dash for cash.
If England lose the ashes they would have held onto them for the shortest period in the history of all ashes clashes after Australia held onto them for the longest period in the battle for the ashes.
England don't deserve to retain the ashes in my book.
There performances in the test arena since the last ashes series have been disappoiting for a team touted by the English press as one of the best teams ever.
Losing in Pakistan, drawing in india, drawing to Sri Lanka and winning against pakistan and then getting rolled on the last day in adelaide in a spineless batting performance.
The thing is through the last year when England have performed poorly in test cricket they have always maintained that because they hold the ashes then it doesn't really matter.
Their continued snubbing of One Day Cricket is nothing short of a disgrace.
Compare it to the Australian way where we have strived for success since the ashes defeat and one can see that Australia deserve the ashes more then England.
Thoughts??
England have had a lot of injuries over the last 12 months, been a long time since they've had their best on the paddock.
I think this series would have been much more competitive if England had prepared properly for the first test and got their selections right.
From 2-0 down England won't retain the Ashes, but it should have been more closely contested if England had got their ******** in a pile.
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
14 Dec 2006, 19:27
England have had a lot of injuries over the last 12 months, been a long time since they've had their best on the paddock.
I think this series would have been much more competitive if England had prepared properly for the first test and got their selections right.
From 2-0 down England won't retain the Ashes, but it should have been more closely contested if England had got their ******** in a pile.
So, we lost shane warne in 2003 and 2004
Mcgrath in South Africa earlier on in the year due to family reasons but we still routed South Africa.
England went through undeafeated in 2004 and won the ashes in 05.
England also played good One Day Cricket in 04 and should have won the champions trophy
England don't deserve to hold the ashes.
Cricket will have its say.
peternorth
14 Dec 2006, 19:29
Why is this guy back?
who are you refering to?
england played the series of their lives 16 months ago. credit to them.
however, to be no 1 you have to play top cricket at home and away. obviously dynasties are made that way. if they get their stuff together they have the potential to do that. gotta start somewhere i guess.
i did find it strange that they got the tickettape parade and were awarded OBEs (?). but that was then, its 2-0 in our favour now.
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
14 Dec 2006, 19:29
Why is this guy back?
Because i believe i was wrongly banned and the moderators agreed.
:D :D :D
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
14 Dec 2006, 19:30
who are you refering to?
england played the series of their lives 16 months ago. credit to them.
however, to be no 1 you have to play top cricket at home and away. obviously dynasties are made that way. if they get their stuff together they have the potential to do that. gotta start somewhere i guess.
i did find it strange that they got the tickettape parade and were awarded OBEs (?). but that was then, its 2-0 in our favour now.
The thing is, England treat the Ashes as the unoffical no 1 ranking.
I want those Ashes back.
England don't deserve to hold the ashes.
They beat Australia 2-1, so yes they do deserve it.
You should learn to give credit when it is due, the Poms were worthy winners in 2005.
King Elvis
14 Dec 2006, 19:48
It was always going to be the way.
Look at the Australian Cricket Team - success and domination is expected, and isn't celebrated excessively, more seen as par for the course.
The Poms won a single Series, for the first team in 16 years, and all of a sudden there are ticket tape parades, knighthoods flying around, social engagements all over the place.
One Team got their heads down, arses up, and prepared for this Series.
The other seemed content to enjoy their rare win.
peternorth
14 Dec 2006, 19:48
recall that when we won the sir frank worrell trophy in the windies taylor said that if you beat the world champions on their home dunghill you become no 1? what if......shudder...
likka, you're barracking for australia aren't you? ive read a few of your posts that aren't overly biased towards us
Oh When the Saints
14 Dec 2006, 19:52
This thread would be ironic if England win the series.
FFS.
SorryIHammerChicken
14 Dec 2006, 20:06
England were the better team in the last Ashes but had several little things go their way. It was one of the best series I've witnessed (of course, only having followed cricket about 10 or so years) and it was up for grabs for a large portion. You can't deny that England played well and deserved their win though.
Coming into this series they have been ravaged by injury and had an unsettled lineup. So their formline suggested they wouldn't put up much of a challenge to the Aussies in this series, as Australia are clearly a superior side. Apart from the first Test (and day 5 of the 2nd Test) they have tried their best though and at times have looked OK. But you're right LtD, they don't deserve to retain the Ashes.
Joffaboy
14 Dec 2006, 20:17
i did find it strange that they got the tickettape parade and were awarded OBEs (?). but that was then, its 2-0 in our favour now.
The Aussie team had a tickertape parade after winning the 1989 Ashes in England.
Nothing wrong with celebrating when you have won the Ashes back after 16 long years.
However there is something wrong with a thread like this when the Ashes series is still alive. Premature celebrations have a habit of coming back to bite your arse.
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
14 Dec 2006, 20:39
The Aussie team had a tickertape parade after winning the 1989 Ashes in England.
Nothing wrong with celebrating when you have won the Ashes back after 16 long years.
However there is something wrong with a thread like this when the Ashes series is still alive. Premature celebrations have a habit of coming back to bite your arse.
It isn't a premature celebration
Read the title
What if???
Do you understand the meaning of those Words
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
14 Dec 2006, 21:25
Just getting off post 13
UpForGrabs
14 Dec 2006, 21:57
The Poms won a single Series, for the first team in 16 years, and all of a sudden there are ticket tape parades, knighthoods flying around, social engagements all over the place.
Sounds a bit like the Socceroos. They were lauded left right and centre for just qualifying for the World Cup, never mind how they actually went in the comp. Although they probably could've done without the visit from John Travolta ;)
When you work long and hard towards achieving something you haven't acheived in a long time - and when the achievement is finally reached, you deserve to celebrate as the Poms did last year. Was the reception not exacly the same for the Aussies in 1989? Laps of honour at the VFL Grand Final, AB named Australian of the Year, etc...
It's not like England are the only ones who do this.
belfast_bomber
14 Dec 2006, 22:07
Sounds a bit like the Socceroos. They were lauded left right and centre for just qualifying for the World Cup, never mind how they actually went in the comp. Although they probably could've done without the visit from John Travolta ;)
the world cup isn't a two horse race
dan warna
14 Dec 2006, 22:21
Glen McGraths injury was worth any three english injury's FFS he has more test wickets than the english bowling line up, at a better average than almost any other bowler in history.
he is a better bowler than anything england have and a better outfielder than any english outfielder. how he can still throw it 2 cm of the top of the bails from the rope is amazing, the guy is a cat on the rope inthe outfield.
the english could still win, but its unlikely.
perth is heading for a result but england have to bat 4th which is hard (unless lee bowls pies again)
ALso why martyn and clarke were taken before hussey and hodge is a mystery.
england won the last ashes series, Im hoping we crush them 5 zip here, but Ill be happy with 3.0 at this stage.
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
14 Dec 2006, 22:35
Sounds a bit like the Socceroos. They were lauded left right and centre for just qualifying for the World Cup, never mind how they actually went in the comp. Although they probably could've done without the visit from John Travolta ;)
When you work long and hard towards achieving something you haven't acheived in a long time - and when the achievement is finally reached, you deserve to celebrate as the Poms did last year. Was the reception not exacly the same for the Aussies in 1989? Laps of honour at the VFL Grand Final, AB named Australian of the Year, etc...
It's not like England are the only ones who do this.
I have no problems with them celebrating
Tickertape parades are fine - we had one in 99 when we won the world cup and in 95 when we beat the windies at home
03 i think we might have had a small function but a week or 2 after the event we were focusing on the next challenge.
What i found interesting was the flood of publications coming out of the England camp, KP released an autobiography - the guy is a great player but his test career is only 16 months old.
Fletcher released a book called "Ashes Regained" - a title in itself which is tempting fate.
Flintoff released a book and i think Vaughan did as well.
By all means - the England players enjoyed themselves after the ashes victory - tickertape parades, marathon drinking sessions, OBE's etc, etc.
The thing is - England then got BELTED in Pakistan. They lost 2 - 0
They then drew in India - 1-1, a good achievement which was celebrated like a win. That would never happen with Australia.
Everything was rosy according to English press.
Some even rated their team in the top 5 ever assembled after one series victory.
England then drew to Sri Lanka at home 1-1, a bad result by anyones criteria.
They then beat a home-sick Pakistan
During this period i read countless articles still harping on about the Ashes, how great it was, the pride of England, the skill of Flintoff, the tactical nous of Vaughan (where was the tactical nous where Lee and Kasper were flaying england around the park), the amazing scenes.
FFS, this was 6 months earlier and they were still going on about it.
On the other hand, Australia took everygame seriously, even one dayers which others, especially England press, laugh at and joke off as meaningless money making ventures.
Training picked up, coaching staff recruited, plans devised, data collected, every game was serious.
The results followed.
England kept harping on about the ashes.
They passed of defeats saying that because they held the ashes everything would be fine.
England's one day cricket was shocking, players egos grew, the loses were passed off.
Sooner or later all of this will catch up on England.
Cricket does not allow players to pick and chose which games are important.
Cricket also rewards hard work.
England went through 04 undefeated in the test arena, there one day cricket was still average but they improved nearly winning the champions trophy and coming back late in South Africa.
In hindsight England were primed for an Ashes assault, once again, cricket gods reward hard work.
Ponder my thoughts and observations.
That is all.
Thank You Very Much Indeed.
GoSydneySwans
14 Dec 2006, 22:42
the world cup isn't a two horse race
And Australia didn't win the world cup.
Underdog
14 Dec 2006, 22:54
And Australia didn't win the world cup.
We were in with a shot against the eventual champions before a terrible decision cut us down :p
eddiesmith
14 Dec 2006, 23:55
They then drew in India - 1-1, a good achievement which was celebrated like a win. That would never happen with Australia.
Interesting as most Aussie fans still say they did a great job to draw a series in Australia against India a couple of years back
You make a mockery of the injury argument comparing missing McGrath for 1 series against some ******** team to missing half our team for the 2 toughest series for touring teams, only way to win in India and Pakistan is to stay fit and healthy with a best XI, of course the Aussies got lucky the last time they went to India with their worst player in Indian conditions getting injured
Grimwood
15 Dec 2006, 00:12
Ironic? No, but it'll be bloody annoying if you're going to be here, coming up with this kind of post for the next 2 and a half years.
For the record I'd make Pakistan favourites against Australia in Pakistan at the moment.
red+black
15 Dec 2006, 00:31
...
Good post, and spot on.
Assuming Australia win the Ashes back, and we most certainly will, England's reign will be the shortest in Ashes history, which, while England were deserved winners in 2005, confirms that they are not in the same league as us. England have not performed over the long term, they have no depth to speak of, and they can't even pick their best team.
Can any English cricketer compare their results to McGrath (0 losses in last 20 Tests) or Hussey (13 Tests, 12 wins, 1 draw) or Clark (6 Tests, 6 wins) or Lee (6 losses in 56 Tests) or Gilchrist (10 losses in 87 Tests)? England shouldn't get so wrapped up in a solitary narrow series win, but try to string some medium-term results together. Sure they have some injuries, but so did Australia in 1995 on the eve of the West Indies tour. Our two best bowlers, McDermott and Fleming, got injured and predictions of a 4-0 whitewash were all over the papers. We've been the #1 team ever since.
England have to stop deluding themselves. Flintoff talks about the 2nd Test like they almost won it. They were competitive and almost drew, as good as a win in their eyes. They need to be ruthless, more desperate. Their play for much of the 2nd Test was of a team happy to earn a draw, not one looking to win. That is not a strategy worthy of the supposed #2 Test team in the world.
I still have hope for England, and once Fletcher, Giles and Geraint Jones are banished forever, they will start heading down the right track. Hopefully Day 1 in Perth is the start of the new England. We all want a competitive series.
belfast_bomber
15 Dec 2006, 01:24
I think it's only the shortest reign in ashes history if we win this perth test. though I wouldn't have a clue what the record actually is.
red+black
15 Dec 2006, 08:12
I think it's only the shortest reign in ashes history if we win this perth test. though I wouldn't have a clue what the record actually is.
If Australia win back the Ashes, even if it's in Sydney on Day 5, England's reign will still be the shortest in history.
The previous record was 1 year 187 days after the Bodyline series (16/02/1933 - 22/08/1934). England won the Ashes last year on 12/09/2005.
If Australia regain the Ashes on Day 5 in Perth, that's 1 year 97 days, Day 5 in Melbourne, 1 year 109 days, and Day 5 Sydney, 1 year 116 days.
Renegade
15 Dec 2006, 10:11
So, we lost shane warne in 2003 and 2004
A little bit different, we lose a handful of guys to injury which was unfortunate but that happens. Warne was out because he was a drug cheat, much different.
LIONS then DAYLIGHT
15 Dec 2006, 10:45
A little bit different, we lose a handful of guys to injury which was unfortunate but that happens. Warne was out because he was a drug cheat, much different.
Yes but at the end of the day they team sheet was
INS
OUTS
TheColeTrain
15 Dec 2006, 11:19
No its not ironic, its many things but ironic isn't one of them;)
red+black
15 Dec 2006, 14:28
No its not ironic, its many things but ironic isn't one of them;)
Hence the irony.
belfast_bomber
15 Dec 2006, 19:15
No its not ironic, its many things but ironic isn't one of them;)
alanis morrissette, come on down!
TorresIsGod
15 Dec 2006, 19:56
England have had a lot of injuries over the last 12 months, been a long time since they've had their best on the paddock.
I think this series would have been much more competitive if England had prepared properly for the first test and got their selections right.
From 2-0 down England won't retain the Ashes, but it should have been more closely contested if England had got their ******** in a pile.
What is your preferred English XI? (if they have absolutely everyone to pick from)
Strauss
Trescothick/Cook
Cook/Bell/Vaughan
Bell/Collingwood/Vaughan
Pietersen
Flintoff
Jones/Read
Giles/Panesar
Hoggard
Harmison
Jones/Anderson/Mahmood
Gunnar Longshanks
15 Dec 2006, 22:14
England lose the ashes after holding them for approximately 16 months after a 16 year drought.A strange coincidence, perhaps.
But not "ironic".