5th Ashes Test England v Australia July 27-31 1930hrs @ The Oval

Who will win?


  • Total voters
    97
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

if they don’t let two tail Enders put on 50, there is, isn’t there

Slightly more attacking?

Is that a code word for statistically the most attacking side over an extended period in the history of the sport?
I dont get what you mean here?

Alot of good thats done them. Couldnt beat us at home against possibly our worst ever captain, us starting most innings 1 down opening with warner, then no Lyon.

BAZBALL
 
It's a bit that, but it's also the hubris and the "saving cricket", "playing all the cricket" drivel. "It felt like we won", yeah I suppose that messed with people's heads because it was unmitigated bollocks.

Controversial opinion but I thought it actually sucked. The declaration in the first test, the throwing away of wickets; once England changed from stupidity to good old fashioned aggressive batting, well, shock horror, they started getting results their way!
I forgot the best bit too, the bit where they said they didn't care if they won.

Bazball is a dumb name, and you are right the cricketing strategy and tactics of it are highly worthy of discussion. But that's not how bazball works, there's a full blown marketing campaign of hot air that comes with it, with little room for real analysis.

That's what pissed everyone off. They wouldn't let the cricket do the talking.
 
The ‘it felt like we won’ I disagree with because the fact is if you don’t win, you didn’t win. The saving cricket part? The jury is out on that but who knows it very well could in some capacity.
Maybe in England. I don't think we have a full appreciation of how little interest there is in the game there? They seem to push T20 and The Hundred pretty hard.

Crowds have been coming to tests in good numbers there all century (at least for Ashes).

Maybe this style is needed for the low crowd in places like South Africa etc.

I don't know. I just think we have plenty of flat pitch cricket already.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

It’s not just the media, the players are high on their own supply. They are not ‘saving’ cricket at all, they are making it a little more popular in their little island, ignoring the fact it was their own hubris after 2005 that cruelled interest. They are not playing all the cricket, they are not winning when they lost, they are not upholding the spirit of cricket, they are one of the more boorish teams going around.

Bazball is as much PR as it is tactics.
 
Remember when they said results don't matter after losing the first two tests?

On the last day at the Oval, they sure as **** didn't look like a bunch of guys who didn't care about the result.

Pure PR spin.
 
That's it now, no white ball following the Ashes.
Australia A vs New Zealand A.
Australia playing a T20 series in South Africa late August .
 
Loving all the talk of how much better England was during the series from some. Not sure I was watching the same series. One dominant performant out of 5 with the other 4 being close is now the criteria for one team being much better than the other.

And Broad getting a "fairy tale" ending. If failing to win back the Ashes at home is a fairy tale for England in any way then sign me up. But I forgot that results don't matter now apparently. Didn't realize standards were this low for England, may it long continue.


unnamed.png
Still ours
 
I dont get what you mean here?

Alot of good thats done them. Couldnt beat us at home against possibly our worst ever captain, us starting most innings 1 down opening with warner, then no Lyon.

BAZBALL


You can piss on the tactics and the catchphrase all you want.

What they’ve done, statistically, is the equivalent to a bottom four AFL team going to the top four in one season so giving them shit about their gameplan seems utterly stupid.
 
You can piss on the tactics and the catchphrase all you want.

What they’ve done, statistically, is the equivalent to a bottom four AFL team going to the top four in one season so giving them s**t about their gameplan seems utterly stupid.
It isnt like that at all. Not even close

They didnt win the series! At home no less

What a bizarre line of thinking. Thats BAZBALL
 
I thought when they did the extra Ashes series in England about 10 years ago it was to avoid that, did the BCCI change the world cup timing?
I think this was specifically for the world cup timing relative to the WC in Australia- so that extra series moved a home ashes clashing with the World Cup to an away Ashes following that world cup. This was better for scheduling if Aus is hosting, but means another of the big tours close to the WC from an Aus perspective as well as the Indian tours syncing up at a similar time
 
It isnt like that at all. Not even close

They didnt win the series! At home no less

What a bizarre line of thinking. Thats BAZBALL

Sorry, but it is.

Drawing a series, home or away, with the world’s best team, from where they were 16 months ago, is exactly like that.

You seem to have this bizarre view that a tactic which vastly improves a team that was absolute gutter trash, must be a failure if it doesn’t topple the world’s best side.

Anyone with a brain understands that you can’t go from 2 wins in 18 tests or whatever it was, to 12 wins and a draw in 17 tests, with a ‘failed’ change in game plan. You can dislike it all you want. It doesn’t change reality
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Can't find it but there's that famous photo of Ponting (captain) and Clarke (VC) during the 2010/11 ashes looking totally forlorn on one of the dressing room balconies (pretty sure Sydney).

Ponting was a very good leader of men but tactically definitely not great.
Must have fallen short in any Ashes; on another tact why did Cummins repeat Paines decision to put England in; what a daft move.
 
Sorry, but it is.

Drawing a series, home or away, with the world’s best team, from where they were 16 months ago, is exactly like that.

You seem to have this bizarre view that a tactic which vastly improves a team that was absolute gutter trash, must be a failure if it doesn’t topple the world’s best side.

Anyone with a brain understands that you can’t go from 2 wins in 18 tests or whatever it was, to 12 wins and a draw in 17 tests, with a ‘failed’ change in game plan. You can dislike it all you want. It doesn’t change reality
I haven't followed them closely - why would you say they were so bad 16 months ago? Did they more or less have the same players?
 
I haven't followed them closely - why would you say they were so bad 16 months ago? Did they more or less have the same players?

Bowling attack was similar but they had players like Rory Burns, Dom Sibley, Dawid Malan, Dan Lawrence, Buttler was keeping wicket - these guys were just trash at test level. Sam Billings, Hasib Hameed.
Obviously I’m not privy to selection meetings but it seemed like most of these guys were picked because they were viewed as scrappers who could grind their team into a game and root and stokes would be the stroke players. Buttler as well. Bairstow was in and out of the side at that time.

It’s not use picking scrappers if they are all ordinary - one or two in a side is fine but they seemed to rotate through 3-4 at a time and it was just getting them nowhere.

When you look at the players they have now, Pope (50) is the only one who has an exceptional first class record - Duckett and Brook average in the low 40s which is still ok but not brilliant, and Crawley is in the 30s - but they offer a threat. If you’re a team who is expressly trying to win - just win - at all costs, I think you’re smarter to take the chance that 1-2 of your top 7 will smash 80+ each match or innings even if they fail the next game or two, rather than go with guys who’s records might be similar in terms of average but are simply a bit more likely to scrape out a slow 30-50 score with regularity but never put the other team under much pressure
 
Last edited:
There was a lot of criticism of his captaincy at the time.
A lot of what we see as fans was probably deserved.

When players retire and you get more insights to behind the scenes in the inner sanctum in books and what not you realise what a strong leader punter was.

We probably underestimated his leadership in ODI cricket yeah we had great sides but we still got the job done in 03 & 07 WC we didn't lose a game despite having setbacks with key players pulling out in both tournaments.
 
One got beaten by a better team and Patty bottled it with some shocking tactics.

Although interestingly I saw something the other day that the formidable and unbreakable fast bowling trio of Starc, Cummins and Hazlewood have led Australia to just 1 series victory outside Australia in their careers together.
Pakistan and Hazlewood didn't even play the test they won.

So technically it's zero.
 
View attachment 1764150


They really believe they won the series don't they

Oh ffs.

Where does it say that?

Is it THAT unreasonable to conclude that a team who got destroyed by Australia can draw a series with them next time around, plus drawn test that they dominated, and form the belief that ‘hey, this worked even against the number 1 team in the world’?
 
Oh ffs.

Where does it say that?

Is it THAT unreasonable to conclude that a team who got destroyed by Australia can draw a series with them next time around, plus drawn test that they dominated, and form the belief that ‘hey, this worked even against the number 1 team in the world’?

Not to much went against them. Still chased tail.
 
Back
Top