Will England ever learn?

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Just watching a bit of the England - New Zealand telecast and due to the rain, Botham, Gower and Ian Smith were talking about England and how far they have come and what not.

When Smith was asked what he thought of England he said that he thought that if the Ashes were played tomorrow England would win. Basically, Botham and Gower nodded heads and then started saying that the Ashes is what everyone is building for and what not.

First of all, England have to get rid of the notion that the Ashes are the be all and end all. Have a look at us, after we won the Ashes but lost the One Day Series everyone wanted to know what was going on, if that were England, nobody could have given a stuff, least of all the team.

In 2005 after winning the Ashes, England then went and got thumped by Pakistan. Even if England win the next ashes series, how can they become a world force if they concentrate on one series and then jeopardise the rest of them with a blase' attitude. Oh, its alright, we have the Ashes. That is the difference between Australia and England, we strive for and expect continued success.

Thoughts?

[usalion]

I love what not....

England simply won't win consistently until they develop a tough program to build their test team....like Australia has the shield comp

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Just watching a bit of the England - New Zealand telecast and due to the rain, Botham, Gower and Ian Smith were talking about England and how far they have come and what not.

When Smith was asked what he thought of England he said that he thought that if the Ashes were played tomorrow England would win. Basically, Botham and Gower nodded heads and then started saying that the Ashes is what everyone is building for and what not.

First of all, England have to get rid of the notion that the Ashes are the be all and end all. Have a look at us, after we won the Ashes but lost the One Day Series everyone wanted to know what was going on, if that were England, nobody could have given a stuff, least of all the team.

In 2005 after winning the Ashes, England then went and got thumped by Pakistan. Even if England win the next ashes series, how can they become a world force if they concentrate on one series and then jeopardise the rest of them with a blase' attitude. Oh, its alright, we have the Ashes. That is the difference between Australia and England, we strive for and expect continued success.

Thoughts?I reckon the Ashes is also our major series. Remember when we lost in 2005? We were way more gutted then when we lost to India.

For me, the annoying thing about England is how quickly their pendulum swings.

They beat a very weak New Zealand side - and were pretty unconvincing for most of the series - and they suddenly decide that they're favourites for the Ashes.

But when they got beaten in Sri Lanka in December, they were shitting themselves, saying how far away they were from being on Australia's level.

Here's an article from one of their correspondents back then:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22967071-5001505,00.html

Beating a very ordinary Kiwi side has supposedly reversed all of that.

Whether they're winning or losing, the Poms over-react. It makes it very hard to get a balanced assessment out of them.

Let's see how they go against South Africa. If they lose, you can bet the Poms will quickly decide that they're terrible again.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Well said.

[Grimwood]

Alright then.

Let's forget about the Ashes. We'll call it off.

You can play more T20 cricket instead.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Cmon Grimwood, be serious.

Fact is, England would probably benefit from not thinking ahead to much, and building the series up to some sort of holy grail, because afterwards what are the players going to do?

Probably end up getting smashed for the next year, and the short turnaround means the Ashes are on in just over a year after the 2009 Ashes.

England should concentrate on playing some quality cricket for a CONSISTENT PERIOD, last time the press were embrassing, asking KP if he still respected Ponting after the 2005 Ashes. I mean, Ponting has achieved more individually then the entire English cricket team put together. Yet the English press are asking questions as condescending as this.

Those who ignore history are destined to repeat it.

Also nice to see England doing us a favour, and not having a test at Monty's favourite spinning venue :D :D :D

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Cmon Grimwood, be serious.

Fact is, England would probably benefit from not thinking ahead to much, and building the series up to some sort of holy grail, because afterwards what are the players going to do?

Probably end up getting smashed for the next year, and the short turnaround means the Ashes are on in just over a year after the 2009 Ashes.

England should concentrate on playing some quality cricket for a CONSISTENT PERIOD, last time the press were embrassing, asking KP if he still respected Ponting after the 2005 Ashes. I mean, Ponting has achieved more individually then the entire English cricket team put together. Yet the English press are asking questions as condescending as this.

Those who ignore history are destined to repeat it.

Also nice to see England doing us a favour, and not having a test at Monty's favourite spinning venue :D :D :DI reckon this discussion will be more interesting after the series against South Africa.

If the Poms wins, good luck to them - they'll have a reason to start getting confident.

But I reckon the Saffas will knock them over. And then the Poms will be back to square one and this little ego boost after beating New Zealand will look ridiculous.

[Grimwood]

Cmon Grimwood, be serious.

You're the one who made this thread after seeing a Kiwi talking about England's chances.

I can't see that there's anything to suggest that England aren't attempting to play quality cricket for a consistent period. We're picking our strongest possible team in both forms of the game and if they're not good enough to win test series then so be it.

There are hundreds of problems with English cricket but I'm not sure that telling Beefy's tubby, Kiwi mate to keep quiet is heading the list (although keeping Beefy quiet might be fairly high up).

[sneakydaycrawler]

You're the one who made this thread after seeing a Kiwi talking about England's chances.

I can't see that there's anything to suggest that England aren't attempting to play quality cricket for a consistent period. We're picking our strongest possible team in both forms of the game and if they're not good enough to win test series then so be it.

There are hundreds of problems with English cricket but I'm not sure that telling Beefy's tubby, Kiwi mate to keep quiet is heading the list (although keeping Beefy quiet might be fairly high up).
well said.

[likka]

Whether they're winning or losing, the Poms over-react. It makes it very hard to get a balanced assessment out of them.

Sounds a lot like BF actually.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

You're the one who made this thread after seeing a Kiwi talking about England's chances.

I can't see that there's anything to suggest that England aren't attempting to play quality cricket for a consistent period. We're picking our strongest possible team in both forms of the game and if they're not good enough to win test series then so be it.

There are hundreds of problems with English cricket but I'm not sure that telling Beefy's tubby, Kiwi mate to keep quiet is heading the list (although keeping Beefy quiet might be fairly high up).

A kiwi said it in the presence of 2 Englishmen being Gower and Botham. Who both seemed to agree, esepcially Botham, who kept nodding his head in agreement.

The fact England are building the Ashes up to be a be all and end all type contest is exactly the problem that is wrong with English cricket, as i was suggesting in my original post. The Ashes are a year away, a long time in cricket, yet England seem fixated with them.

Now, correct me if im wrong, but in the leadup to the Ashes of 2005 England had a similar build-up. So much so, that after winning their first one day game in 14 attempts against Australia, they then concluded that they could beat us in the Ashes. Everything was about the Ashes, EVERYTHING, so after England's magnificient victory it was only natural for the team to have a let-down, and it showed, with England playing some of the worst cricket in the 18 months following the Ashes of 2005 to eventually end up losing 5 - 0 and getting booted out of the world cup early.

How is that playing consistent cricket? It isn't.

Have a look at Australia, Ponting wanted to win everything, even games against Bangladesh when he'd get worked up with umpires, everyone was thinking, it's only Bangladesh. Sure, he had one eye on the Ashes, but he wanted to win whatever game, or tournament his team was in at the time, and he concentrated soley on that. It was a magnificinet performance from the world's best captain.

So when i see England play and i hear Botham and Gower agreeing with Ian Smith about whatever they were talking about regarding the Ashes of 2009, i think, i think, this series is a year away, and they cant talk about anything else, as i said, those who ignore history are destined to repeat it.

[SydneyDon]

A good observation. It seems to be the English way I think.

Remember when they won the Rugby World Cup in 2003, they basically celebrated for 3 years, meanwhile losing nearly every test they played.
But oh, what about the World Cup, aren't we great, the Queen has friggin Knighted us. :rolleyes:

[SydneyDon]

One big differences that exits between the English and the Aussies is the culture and social demographic of their players.

I remember the mistake of trying to talk cricket with an English bloke who you would describe as the typical Geordie battler. He snarled something like 'f'ing Toffs game, don't care for it'. I was initially taken aback. This guy was a soccer/pint/meat and 2 veg kind of bloke. Cricket is still very much a Toffs game, especially in the South.

You never find an Aussie who hasn't played a bit of cricket here. It is an everymans sport.

Now I don't know whether this has anything to do with the win at all costs, take no prisoners style we have always had but I suspect it does.
The English do get excited by a great win over us but are more accepting of losing as long as they gave it a 'jolly good show'.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

A good observation. It seems to be the English way I think.

Remember when they won the Rugby World Cup in 2003, they basically celebrated for 3 years, meanwhile losing nearly every test they played.
But oh, what about the World Cup, aren't we great, the Queen has friggin Knighted us. :rolleyes:

Exactly my point, after we won the Ashes in 2006 we were said it was a great effort and an amazing way to send of 2 greats. But we moved on quickly to the next challenge, i couldn't imagine Ponting to go out and bat during the world cup and think, ah, who cares if we lose, we have the ashes.

With England, especially the press, i got the feeling that when they were losing after the Ashes that it didnt really matter, because they 'had the Ashes".

Have a look at this article i have cited to illustrate my point. The whole article can be viewed at this link.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2006/07/31/scmj31.xml

Bear in mind this article was written August of 2006, nearly a whole year after England won the Ashes :eek::rolleyes:

Here are some quotes

The Australians, in that endearingly smug way of theirs, have been so busy airbrushing history since last summer that half the population still think they hold the Ashes.

All that's needed now is for Steve Harmison to recognise that Australia will fear him as much as they do Flintoff, and if he bowls to them as he has just done in this match, then it may be difficult to spot the difference between a kangaroo and an Australian batsman.

A whole year after England won the Ashes this journo decided to write an article trying to shot down our confidence at regaining the Ashes, (justifably so considering we were on a roll at the time) and the photo with the article is also needed to illustrate a point.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/graphics/2006/07/31/scmj31.jpg

[linda]

Just watching a bit of the England - New Zealand telecast and due to the rain, Botham, Gower and Ian Smith were talking about England and how far they have come and what not.

When Smith was asked what he thought of England he said that he thought that if the Ashes were played tomorrow England would win. Basically, Botham and Gower nodded heads and then started saying that the Ashes is what everyone is building for and what not.

First of all, England have to get rid of the notion that the Ashes are the be all and end all. Have a look at us, after we won the Ashes but lost the One Day Series everyone wanted to know what was going on, if that were England, nobody could have given a stuff, least of all the team.

In 2005 after winning the Ashes, England then went and got thumped by Pakistan. Even if England win the next ashes series, how can they become a world force if they concentrate on one series and then jeopardise the rest of them with a blase' attitude. Oh, its alright, we have the Ashes. That is the difference between Australia and England, we strive for and expect continued success.

Thoughts?



All you seem to do is talk about England so who has the problem .Also we actually tour Pakistan

[Black Thunder]

who cares whether the poms think they're favourite for the series.

fact is their cricket team is pretty ordinary at the moment, and although there are some solid performers, as a whole they never be consistently at the top of the tree until they get a tougher brand of county cricket. there are far far too many plodders running around in that competition.

[Grimwood]

Your assertion that England are unable to play quality cricket for a consistent period is not incorrect, but your reasoning seems a little confused.

England's failure to play quality cricket for a consistent period is caused by a lack of quality in their teams. An unhealthy attitude towards series against nations other than Australia would probably compound England's problems, but it's clearly not the root of all England's ills.

If you're more concerned by the amount that 'England' talk about Australia and the Ashes then prehaps you should take a look at the last bunch of threads you've started...

[gingerheadman16]

yeah there seem to be more Ashes talk here than anywhere else.

The English Media will big up any English triumpth. There is always pressure on teams to succeed even if the talent is not there.
You guys dont seem to realise that Englands national sport is not cricket, every kid plays football and rugby before cricket. The reason that 2005 is still talked about is because it introduced alot more people to cricket and brought a buzz back to it for the fans.

As I said cricket is not our national sport but when the Ashes come around every one gets interested so there is no wonder that there is some much excitement around that little urn.

Oh and cricket fans over here arent just toffs, Im a welshman who likes a pie and a pint too, so dont believe any thing that a geordie tells you.