Test The Ashes Fifth Test January 4-8 1000hrs @ The SCG

[sr36]

They've been delusional about Bazball for a while now. Can't imagine that delusion disappearing anytime soon. At least not while McCullum and Stokes are there.

Too much is made of Bazball. I think it detracts from Brooks, but I don't think their openers would do better accumulating - they're not good enough. And going from past tours they've never had 6 blokes who are good enough to accumulate on our pitches. And frankly we also had 3 of our top 6 in Head, Weatherald and Carey playing with a very similar mindset. They had 4 and then down to 3 in this test.

 

[Joffaboy]

So there you go.
Said after '23 retaining the Ashes that bazball was a cult, much like Brexit. You just ignored reality and had to believe harder for success.
I said at the time bazball relied on flat tracks, 59 metre boundaries and the Duke ball to succeed
Would get none of those in Australia.
The pommy media fell for it hook line and sinker.
They were going to win easily. Worst team since 2010, bazball will destroy the old Aussie bowlers.
And the sad part is THEY BELIEVED IT.
Their delusion has been gloriously dismantled by a second string Aussie team missing Hazlewood, Lyon and Cummins for almost all of the tests, Doggett, Naser, Boland covering brilliantly.
Aussie batting Weatherald are rookie, Head moved up the order, Marnus and Smudge off thier best Inglish kept in too long.
5 centuries to three for the Aussies including one from Carey who is now the best keeper in the world.
England and their bs bazball cult has been destroyed 4-1.
And how we allowed these frauds to win one is a disgrace.
Hope Stokes and McCullum are there for another decade.

 

[Alfonz]

No aspersions to Webster, he did a wonderful job but imagine how much we would have won that Test by with a frontline spinner.

I think the complete opposite. Good chance we lose the test with Murphy over Webster.

Murphy would have had minimal impact on England's first innings. Webster gave us 100 extra runs, maybe more. Can't forget the extra runs he allowed Smith to score. England's second innings ... maybe we contain them a bit more, but would Murphy have done much better than 3-64? We'd probably have been chasing over 200, even 250+. And that would have been very tough.

 

[BGman]

How Sweet it is Baggies. Yet another home Ashes series!!

 

[HirdsTheWord]

Because there are 2 winter tests for starters in August and there will be 3 tests on prime time TV against SA to watch

2 tests against Bangladesh in August and 3 tests against SA in Sep/Oct is not a reason to not have a 5 test series against NZ in Dec/Jan.

There are a bunch of ODI against england in Nov 26 but who ****in cares about ODI.

 

[HirdsTheWord]

Do we get anyone else touring next Summer, or do we only get four tests?

2 test V Bangladesh in Aug 26

3 test vs SA in Sep/Oct 26

4 Tests v NZ in Dec 26/Jan 27

there are a bunch of ODI and T20 scattered between but who ****in cares about those.

that series against NZ should be 5 tests.

 

[katana]

Do we get anyone else touring next Summer, or do we only get four tests?

straight off to india for 5 in prime TV slot

 

[Moonwatcher]

Fun series, best side won, we’ll go again in 15 months at the G!

Next Ashes must be only 18 months away too.

 

[katana]

2 test V Bangladesh in Aug 26

3 test vs SA in Sep/Oct 26

4 Tests v NZ in Dec 26/Jan 27

there are a bunch of ODI and T20 scattered between but who ****in cares about those.

that series against NZ should be 5 tests.

five in india, five in england in 2027 would be also why.

 

[passmark]

The Weatherald non decision was a wonderful bit of icing on the cake.

Carse losing his marbles at the umps, batsmen and anyone who’d listen was priceless.

His reviews were embarrassing and he made a campaigner of himself.

Suck shit u pommy/Yarpie ****stick.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Once more, just for a laff

 

[sr36]

I'm sure the Poms do some research on their opposition but I did read that McCullum did away with team meetings because 'Harry Brook doesn't do them'

Brook comes across as a real FIGJAM to me. Doesn't seem to give a toss about how he gets out

I don't think they did enough research on Aussie conditions. They now seam and are not what they were when Baz played.

They brought an attack and a bang it in plan for old Aussie conditions. Where as our pitches would now suit traditional English seamers. Another year and half out of Anderson, Woakes and Broad and this series would have been interesting.

 

[PhatBoy]

If this series doesn't make England genuinely reflect on how bad they approach test cricket nothing will.

Complete lack of perpetration, game plan and in game tactics.

If you put the hyperbole and words like ‘complete’ and ‘how bad’ aside for a moment, it should cause them to reflect, but not in a stupid way.

In Perth they bowled as well on day one as any team has as a unit since their own colleagues 15 years ago. Maybe the Philander/Abbott/Rabada assault in Hobart in 2016.

Their batting was pretty awful in Perth generally but Pope and Brook got them out of trouble on day one only for them to get back in it when they had gotten control. The less said about day two, the better.

Brisbane they were in control again with the bat for large chunks of day one only the back of some relatively punchy batting but some stupid shots at inopportune times changed that. Their tail folded badly. They chewed off a third of the deficit in no time and THEN was the time to pull back. But they have some soft wickets up with hard hands etc and it was left to Stokes and Jacks to try and salvage a score.

In Adelaide they were in absolute cruise control a few times with Crawley and Brook doing it easily in the first innings. Brook didn’t even throw it away there in the first dig and neither did Crawley from memory. They were soft dismissals but not reckless.
The second innings was different but they had to win the game so they didn’t have a choice but to take SOME risks. Why risks involve reverse sweeps, though, i will never understand.

The preparation was terrible, no argument there.
I don’t know that their in game tactics were all that bad: it’s hard to tell when at any given time half your bowling attack is incapable of bowling two balls in a row in the same area of the pitch.

They don’t need to go ‘that approach with the bat was MILES off what we should be doing’ though. This isn’t like when they’ve had Stoneman and Burns and co here and you finish watching the game wondering ‘how on earth could that side ever pose a threat to a decent test team???’ Because quite simply, those teams couldn’t. There’s nothing they could do that would pose that threat. This one can. It doesn’t have to change THAT much.

Not gifting wickets to bowlers like Marnus Labuschagne would be a nice start for them

 

[Rabish Binney]

Too much is made of Bazball. I think it detracts from Brooks, but I don't think their openers would do better accumulating - they're not good enough. And going from past tours they've never had 6 blokes who are good enough to accumulate on our pitches. And frankly we also had 3 of our top 6 in Head, Weatherald and Carey playing with a very similar mindset.

Agree with some of that SR, however in the 2nd innings of the Adelaide test, Crawley played 'normally' and looked really good.

That's what I cant understand about him. Looks like a million dollars when he bats and then plays a stupid shot to get out.

A test average of 31 reflects that.

 

[Jimthegreat]

I think the complete opposite. Good chance we lose the test with Murphy over Webster.

Murphy would have had minimal impact on England's first innings. Webster gave us 100 extra runs, maybe more. Can't forget the extra runs he allowed Smith to score. England's second innings ... maybe we contain them a bit more, but would Murphy have done much better than 3-64? We'd probably have been chasing over 200, even 250+. And that would have been very tough.

I had Murphy over Green. Murphy would have applied more pressure then Webster. That's gets wickets even if it is at the other end. Carse got 22 wickets but applied little pressure, which mean we just we could bat along our merry way. Beau bowled some great balls but naturally wasn't as consistent with line and length as a specialist spinner. If Webster was turning it, then a frontliner would have been dangerous. They may have bowl a bit in tandem, which may have got wickets for both of them.

 

[Andrew Mc]

2 tests against Bangladesh in August and 3 tests against SA in Sep/Oct is not a reason to not have a 5 test series against NZ in Dec/Jan.

There are a bunch of ODI against england in Nov 26 but who ****in cares about ODI.

NZ also have a schedule. India will be there for 2 Tests prior, and SL there for 2 Tests after.

 

[Linda Lovelace]

TBF, England had their full complement of bowlers for the first test.
Australia had no Cummins and Hazlewood.

England only lost Wood for the second test.
Australia again without Cummins and Hazlewood.

Australia won both.

Sure England lost some bowlers towards the end, but the series was done and dusted by then.

It's hardly a fair comparison IMO.

We were missing Hazlewood and Lyon because they are elderly and/or crippled. This bad 'luck' isn't really luck at all.

We were missing McGrath and Warne too.

Anyway, this whole discussion is boring and pointless.

 

[Moonwatcher]

What was the last time England won an Ashes series?

 

[passmark]

If you put the hyperbole and words like ‘complete’ and ‘how bad’ aside for a moment, it should cause them to reflect, but not in a stupid way.

In Perth they bowled as well on day one as any team has as a unit since their own colleagues 15 years ago. Maybe the Philander/Abbott/Rabada assault in Hobart in 2016.

Their batting was pretty awful in Perth generally but Pope and Brook got them out of trouble on day one only for them to get back in it when they had gotten control. The less said about day two, the better.

Brisbane they were in control again with the bat for large chunks of day one only the back of some relatively punchy batting but some stupid shots at inopportune times changed that. Their tail folded badly. They chewed off a third of the deficit in no time and THEN was the time to pull back. But they have some soft wickets up with hard hands etc and it was left to Stokes and Jacks to try and salvage a score.

In Adelaide they were in absolute cruise control a few times with Crawley and Brook doing it easily in the first innings. Brook didn’t even throw it away there in the first dig and neither did Crawley from memory. They were soft dismissals but not reckless.
The second innings was different but they had to win the game so they didn’t have a choice but to take SOME risks. Why risks involve reverse sweeps, though, i will never understand.

The preparation was terrible, no argument there.
I don’t know that their in game tactics were all that bad: it’s hard to tell when at any given time half your bowling attack is incapable of bowling two balls in a row in the same area of the pitch.

They don’t need to go ‘that approach with the bat was MILES off what we should be doing’ though. This isn’t like when they’ve had Stoneman and Burns and co here and you finish watching the game wondering ‘how on earth could that side ever pose a threat to a decent test team???’ Because quite simply, those teams couldn’t. There’s nothing they could do that would pose that threat. This one can. It doesn’t have to change THAT much.

Not gifting wickets to bowlers like Marnus Labuschagne would be a nice start for them

Their professionalism is piss poor and their resilience almost non existent.

Their not good enough to rely on ability.

 

[sr36]

Once more, just for a laff

Carey behind the stumps versus Carey with a bat in his hand is very Jekyll and Hyde. Goes from as cool as a cucumber to a bit mental.

 

[Linda Lovelace]

What was the last time England won an Ashes series?

They've won an Ashes series in Australia far more recently than we've won one in England.

 

[BGman]

3 test vs SA in Sep/Oct 26

This should be 4 tests given how much the Saffers have improved over the past 18 mths. And the fact they are current world champs.

Pleased we are giving the Kiwis four as their fans have been crying out for a multi Tests series.

 

[Tugga27]

We were missing Hazlewood and Lyon because they are elderly and/or crippled. This bad 'luck' isn't really luck at all.

We were missing McGrath and Warne too.

Anyway, this whole discussion is boring and pointless.

Conveniently forget about Cummins again.

No one said it was "bad luck".

If you think it's pointless, how about stop banging on about it?

 

[Ford Fairlane]

 

[philreich]

Yep, but also helped that England made many themselves.

We'll have to play a helluva lot better in South Africa, to be competitive.