| Poster | Message |
|---|
Newroad
|  27 Aug '05 11:44 : 0 recs : edited 2 times : last edit 27 Aug '05 11:55
Hi Hoog,
I agree with your implicit assertion that the English bowlers, especially with Australia sans McGrath, are the difference between the teams.
I know you don't think much of Katich's movement, but I, and I think most of the commentators, thought Katich looked OK this morning. Probably his best touch since the 2nd innings at Lords.
With your "dropping Giles" comment, would your intention be to ensure at least a draw if England win here? It would be a very dangerous choice, given that the Oval can take serious spin (some are talking about Australia playing MacGill)?
Regards, Newroad
Edit: Just to clarify a couple of points, I have never suggested lack of neutrality with the umpires. When I said bad luck, I meant it. Further, I have not used the bad decisions as an excuse, per se, and have been at pains to acknowledge England as currently the better team. |
|
| |  You must either register or login to post to Serious Topics. |
|
Hoog
| 27 Aug '05 11:38 : 0 recs
The fact is, the England team are creating far more chances in the field – so more decisions will probably go in England’s favour. Irrespectively, the umpires are neutral, so I judge your excuses as feeble.
Katich was dancing around the crease, lunging outside the off stump this morning. To be fair, the Australian batsmen have to face Englands bowlers – which is much tougher than facing the pie chucking that Australia managed to deliver.
If England win this game (and I think they will), I would consider dropping Giles for another specialist batsman for the fifth test.
Rgds,
*Pie Chucker Hoog*  |
|
| | You must either register or login to post to Serious Topics. |
|
Newroad
| 27 Aug '05 11:25 : 0 recs
Hi Hoog,
Other than possibly your description of Tait, whose debut I thought was useful, we appear to be talking about the same series 
It is interesting to note of the four batsmen you mention who can bat for Australia, two were not out (except in the scorebook) in the first innings! Katich also looked OK this morning, though you will see below I would nevertheless give Hodge a chance.
The decline in Australia's dominance seems to be ending one Ashes earlier than I expected. But all is not lost yet. Australia need to play for respect this innings, with the outside chance of a draw/win. Then, they need to pick their truly best team for the last test and give it their all. This way, if they win, they can be proud. And if England claim they Ashes, they will know they beat the best Australia had to offer, at least once, to do it.
Anyway Hoog, enjoy it while you can - it may not last  I am not quite as easy to wind-up as the doom-mongers  You never know, we might get back to the same form as that last country we annihilated earlier in the year.
Regards, Newroad |
|
| | You must either register or login to post to Serious Topics. |
|
Hoog
| 27 Aug '05 11:17 : 0 recs
Comrade Newroad, you appear to be missing a great series.
“One hand, one million, no tears.”
Australia’s bowling in this test was woeful.
Tait looked raw. Kasprowicz looked like a journeyman. Lee looked inconsistent. Only Warne was up to standard.
On the batting side, Katich does not look to be of the required standard. Hayden appears to be a flat track bully. Flintoff gets Gilchrist out for fun.
Langer, Ponting, Clarke and Martyn seem like the only batsmen who are likely to score many…
Australia has been punished in this series for having an attack that lacks quality and depth, outside of Warne/McGrath...
Rgds,
*Hoog* |
|
| | You must either register or login to post to Serious Topics. |
|
little c
| 27 Aug '05 11:17 : 0 recs : edited 5 times : last edit 27 Aug '05 11:22
Greetings to Sir Hoog! I trust that you have had a good week. Nevertheless, here is the legendary 'c' list for Newroad:
a. whining
b. wining
c. winning
As Australia is forced to follow on in the fourth test at Trent Bridge as I write this very posting, perhaps I should address both your points below directly (27 Aug '05 12:10 : 0 recs):
a. I would have spelled "wining" as "whining" myself.
As it is the weekend, let us therefore open a bottle of Jacob's Creek. Cheers!
b. Difficult as it is to speak/write about it when I am as disillusioned with things (both the poor performance and abnormally bad luck of the Australians) as I am, I hope I have done the various topics justice, and with a little bias as possible.
You have indeed done all topics far more justice than little c. Congratulations! |
|
| | You must either register or login to post to Serious Topics. |
|
Newroad
| 27 Aug '05 11:10 : 0 recs
Hi Little c,
I would have spelled "wining" as "whining" myself.
Difficult as it is to speak/write about it when I am as disillusioned with things (both the poor performance and abnormally bad luck of the Australians) as I am, I hope I have done the various topics justice, and with a little bias as possible.
The above was my intent, at least.
Regards, Newroad |
|
| | You must either register or login to post to Serious Topics. |
|
little c
| 27 Aug '05 10:46 : 0 recs : edited 1 time : last edit 27 Aug '05 10:46
Out of interest, Newroad, have you finally become a "wining" pom? |
|
| | You must either register or login to post to Serious Topics. |
|
Newroad
| 27 Aug '05 09:20 : 0 recs : edited 1 time : last edit 27 Aug '05 09:33
Next sub-topic: Umpires
Boycott has for some time been crying out for the use of technology in this area for some time. All countries have experienced unfortunate decisions over the years. Yesterday, and in general for the series, it has been primarily Australia on the receiving end.
There is no doubt that England are playing the better cricket at present, but look how close results were in the last two tests, and that not withstanding Damien Martyn's first howler from Steve Bucknor. Yesterday, the howler count was 2-0 against Australia and the very bad decision count 4-1 against Australia.
Flintoff given not out LBW to Warne on 8 (very bad decision)
Jones G given not out caught behind first ball after lunch (howler)
Langer given not out LBW to Hoggard (very bad decision)
Ponting given out LBW to Jones after fine inside edge (very bad decision)
Martyn given out LBW to Hoggard after less fine inside edge [again] (howler)
Imagine yesterday had Flintoff gone for 8 rather than 100+. It would be a much different match. I can't then say how the next four would have gone because the match would be different, but you get the picture. |
|
| | You must either register or login to post to Serious Topics. |
|
Newroad
| 27 Aug '05 09:12 : 0 recs
Next sub-topic: Australian Selection
On the assumption that injuries are not a factor, I think Australia's bowlers select themselves for the next test. McGrath, Lee, Tait, Warne. This is a very good attack, probably as good as, though not as deep as, Englands.
Only if it is a spinners paradise does there become an issue, with MacGill probably in, and a tough decision as to who to leave out. For me, I would drop Lee, but that is very harsh.
Batting is the selection problem. Forum readers will probably know that I have advocated dropping Hayden for some time. I still am. I would replace him with the in-form Mike Hussey, who opens for WA. Hussey was the best batsman against England in the one-day series, and also, is doing very well in country cricket.
Who to play at no 6 is difficult. Katich has not looked confortable since Lords, where he played very well in the 2nd innings. I would give Hodge the nod, without any particular conviction. The deciding factor for me is that he is a right-hander, and Flintoff and Giles bowl less well to right-handers. |
|
| | You must either register or login to post to Serious Topics. |
|
Newroad
| 27 Aug '05 08:57 : 0 recs
Next sub-topic: English Selection
I didn't rate Flintoff as a proper number 6 batsman, mainly due to a lack of technique. That is probably still there, but nevertheless, with his discipline rising, I think he is transforming into a good number 6 before out eyes. It would not be unreasonable to say that he is the most valuable cricketer in the world today.
I still don't rate Trescothick, once again because of poor technique primarily, but Australia sans McGrath have no been able to bowl tightly enough to him to exploit this.
I earlier also would have replaced Hoggard with Tremlett, though bringing back Hoggard for these two tests. Nevertheless, England must be commended for keeping the team the same and waiting for each player to put their hand up. Whether they will be able to afford this luxury against another team playing well, time will tell.
I am just thankful that England have only a competent, rather than good, spinner. Giles would definitely not get in most other test teams in the world. |
|
| | You must either register or login to post to Serious Topics. |
|
Newroad
| 27 Aug '05 08:47 : 0 recs : edited 1 time : last edit 27 Aug '05 08:47
Morning All, on this new forum,
There is much to say, if there are enough interested people on Serious Topics. As such, I will say quite a bit in a few posts so that each post might be addressed individually. In this first post, I will address the forum topic.
It is likely that England will win The Ashes from here. It is far from certain however. If Australia can manage a full strength team at The Oval, and get a reasonable run with the umpires, The Ashes may yet be saved there. It is still possible we can save this one, but quite unlikely.
As to the forum topic, I think it has only a short life (or one punctuated by 18-30 month intervals). I would suggest
"Which country, if any, will dominate world cricket in the next few years"
Nevertheless, in the short term, I will address the forum question where possible.
Regards, Newroad |
|
| | You must either register or login to post to Serious Topics. |
|
little c
| 27 Aug '05 08:45 : 0 recs : edited 1 time : last edit 27 Aug '05 08:46
Yes, England will. In today's Times, there is an interesting article by Simon Barnes about Andrew Flintoff:
England's trump card goes from Jack-the-lad to a king
Simon concludes thus:
... And so Flintoff has seized his moment. He might have played in three previous Ashes series, but disappointment and injury kept him out. His time is now and he has set the tone of the summer. He has been fiercely competitive, yet there is a strangely benign quality about Flintoff; an innocence, even.
His performances with bat and ball were equally stupendous in the match that England won, at Edgbaston. But more than the roaring triumph and the exuberant whacking, we remember the strangely fitting nature of the match’s conclusion. Australia’s defiant pursuit of unlikely triumph was foiled at the last gasp and Flintoff’s first response to victory — a moment that reveals character like nothing else in sport — was to commiserate with the stricken Brett Lee.
And we who watch loved that, for we like to see our sport played with chivalry as well as with intensity. It was wonderful to feel that here was a great athlete in the form of his life, and he is also a man rich in decency. We admire our heroes. It is an altogether unexpected bonus if we can also like them.
I, too, like a little chivalry, even in cricket. |
|
| | You must either register or login to post to Serious Topics. |
|
little c
| 27 Aug '05 06:17 : 0 recs : edited 1 time : last edit 27 Aug '05 06:53
Thank you very much indeed for setting up this particular thread in serious topics, pawn. It may keep house price chat a little more on topic over the next couple of weeks. On second thoughts, probably not! For the cricketers amongst us, however, the Ashes are not quite the holy grail, but whatever the holy grail really contains, could it be the Ashes?
It is also interesting to note that this particular discussion begins at a point where England appears to be in the ascendancy. For those who are interested in the Ashes, I recommend this particular BBC link as an introduction:
Ashes 2005
Rather amusingly, a small party of serious topics' regulars met up last week at the Nag's Head. There, I got into conversation with the "legendary Argentine". The legendary Argentine had very strong views about what was going on at Old Trafford at the time, to the extent that he claimed that eleven Aussies lay dead on the cricket pitch. What he was arguing was that Australia has already lost the Ashes.
I would not be inclined to put it so forcefully, but I would agree that England certainly now has the psychological advantage. As the BBC put it last night, England put Australia on the rack. I therefore share the legendary Argentine's contention that England will win the Ashes. Indeed, England's bowling attack is becoming more formidable by the day.
We shall see! |
|
| | You must either register or login to post to Serious Topics. |
|
|
|
|
