English cricket in ruins- What happened after the 05 Ashes?

Is that what happened to Batgirl? I only remember her from the film Batman and Robin (the one that basically killed the franchise until Chris Nolan brought it back a decade later), which was the worst film I've ever seen and the only time I've ever walked out of a cinema screening before the end.

Poor thing. She was funny in the film - Alicia Silverstone had been on an all-pie diet and seeing her trying to shoe-horn herself in a gimp outfit was the highlight of the movie.

Dello wrote:Is that what happened to Batgirl? I only remember her from the film Batman and Robin (the one that basically killed the franchise until Chris Nolan brought it back a decade later), which was the worst film I've ever seen and the only time I've ever walked out of a cinema screening before the end.

Poor thing. She was funny in the film - Alicia Silverstone had been on an all-pie diet and seeing her trying to shoe-horn herself in a gimp outfit was the highlight of the movie.

No it's actually just my own particular twisted fantasy.

Like it.

Snow White would've been a better film if one of the Dwarfs (Doc, probably) was a paedophile, keeping the rest locked in a sex-dungeon.

Invader Zim wrote:Aye. It's the END OF THE WORLD since we LOST IN INDIA

Most teams lose in India. Even Australia has only managed it a handful of times in the last 50 years.

No, it's the end of the world now, since we have gone on to lose to South Africa in the Tests and SAf and prolly NZ in the JAMODIs. And it's gonna get worse over the coming months.

There's no point in reverse woofing a side that's just been bowled out for 51 Skully FFS

Eric Air Emu wrote:

Sans Souci wrote:

JKLever wrote:

Sans Souci wrote: Coming where I come from, living where I do

So because you're an Aussie it gives you some sort of sense of 'being right' eh? . Aussie supposed sporting dominance over England has come off the back of Cricket & Swimming. Where were all those world class Aussie athletes whilst GB was producing them, where was the hunger then? Your rugby union team has been despatched 3 world cups running by England, obviously not by lacking hunger though.

Where is the Aussie hunger in their test team now? Oh wait, it's because the quality of player you have isn't what it was isn't it?

I get the feeling that you are taking me out of context everytime on purpose as if I am poking fun or something when I am not. If thats the case then I can't be bothered.

As I said we don't agree and thats pretty much it. But I'm not rubbishing your views.

No I agree when it comes to cricket we've got a great big soft belly. Our football for all it's fault is ferociously competitive at all levels, our Olympians are pretty dedicated, the rugby players seem pretty hard but when it comes to your average professional cricket it's training bra time. I mean really the county championship is like one long scrap over a sequined handbag. No commitment to excellence - just a day job where it's summer all year long. Grrrr...

Agreed. Maybe I didn't get my views accross to San Souci that well. If you mean our cricket can produce a comfort zone then I entirely agree, but yet again that is down to the system rather than any inherent lack of hunger.

JKLever wrote:

Zat wrote:Whoever said the bit about dining out on the success instead of building on it was bang on.

The team were given the cheapest of Queen's honours, and feted as all-conquering heroes for effectively scraping home in a series that could have very easily gone the other way. An umpiring decsion here or there, one less cricket ball on the ground during a warm-up.

And the lesson don't seem to have been learned following the 5-0 spanking down under 15 months later.

Dunno. I look at it the other way.

I think that's why England has gone backwards. They never accepted that they were a bit lucky; they honestly thought they'd reeached the pinnacle.

Today's rsult is a great result for West Indian cricket, Test cricket overall, and (dare I say it) maybe even for English Test cricket.

With respect, I don't think it was some sort of complacency.

More a case of NFI what brings success, and what brings failure.

Like covered-up lack of confidence, covered-up lack of understanding can look like arrogance to the casual view.

Shoking result.

Whilst we're looking for excuses, why don't we just blame it on the diversions created by the IPL auction. Can't really blame KP and Flintoff, can you?

Shortly after the WI test result was out, it is rumoured Lalit Modi, head wand-wielder of the BCCI, sent an e-mail to the ECB:
"My dear chap, you pay peanuts, you get monkeys"...... Cheeky bastard.

But hey, bring on the Ashes. The Aussies are chicken feed now..........compared to the WI, that is.

lardbucket wrote:

I think that's why England has gone backwards. They never accepted that they were a bit lucky; they honestly thought they'd reeached the pinnacle.

With respect, I'd disagree again.

Much like Aus, the loss of key players between 2003-2006 meant we couldn't sustain the run because we lost S Jones, Trescothick & Thorpe for various reasons in that time.

We replaced that lot in the end with Plunkett for Jones, Cook for Tres & Bell for Thorpe.

Add to that fact that Harmison lost form totally.

That was a great Aussie line up they faced in 2005. Only one of our team would have got into yours, so in some respect we needed things to go our way which it did - with the toss, punters decisions etc. That team played to the max of its potential IMO that series.
Personally I think saying a team coming from 1-0 down against that side which could have won 3-1 in the end were lucky is a bit rich.

saying 'they thought they reached the pinnacle, they didn't accept that, didn't accept this' really is the domain of messageboard/forum fans rather than any facts. I don't doubt for a minute they've been trying their balls off.

lardbucket wrote:

I think that's why England has gone backwards. They never accepted that they were a bit lucky; they honestly thought they'd reeached the pinnacle.

That's bollo lardy! Remember that they had won twelve of their last sixteen tests prior to that series, and lost just one. Then they hung onto the #2 position for a eighteen months after.

What happened was that all four of the main quicks got injured long-term and poor old Tres retired due to ill-health. Feltch tried to re-create the 2005 side, not realising that it wouldn't happen and that he should start rebuilding with new players such as Shah, SiBo & Monty.

Augustus wrote:University cricket is dead. There was time when Oxbridge regularly produced England cricketers, but it seems to be gone now. I suppose cricket has become more working-class in many respects.

thats sad...

I read some where that after the 05 ashes cricket in ENG had become as popular as it had ever been for the last 100 years or so but now its at the same level as it was in late 1999 when ENG were LITERALLY at the bottom of the pile

PlanetPakistan wrote:

Augustus wrote:University cricket is dead. There was time when Oxbridge regularly produced England cricketers, but it seems to be gone now. I suppose cricket has become more working-class in many respects.

thats sad...

I read some where that after the 05 ashes cricket in ENG had become as popular as it had ever been for the last 100 years or so but now its at the same level as it was in late 1999 when ENG were LITERALLY at the bottom of the pile

Well if popularity's dropped it's down to one thing only, the fact that there's been no live cricket on non-subscription TV since then. At this rate we could lose a generation of potential new cricketers and cricket watchers, and then where will we be?

beamer wrote:

PlanetPakistan wrote:

Augustus wrote:University cricket is dead. There was time when Oxbridge regularly produced England cricketers, but it seems to be gone now. I suppose cricket has become more working-class in many respects.

thats sad...

I read some where that after the 05 ashes cricket in ENG had become as popular as it had ever been for the last 100 years or so but now its at the same level as it was in late 1999 when ENG were LITERALLY at the bottom of the pile

Well if popularity's dropped it's down to one thing only, the fact that there's been no live cricket on non-subscription TV since then. At this rate we could lose a generation of potential new cricketers and cricket watchers, and then where will we be?

Very true...

The county system surely needs significant reconstruction.
England has not been the best team in the world for 50 years, now. For many decades before that it was seldom below No 2.

Around 1956 Peter May suggested that tthe counties should be boiled down to some six regional sides, which played each other twice a year. The quality of each team would be far more concentrated, akin to Australian state sides.

It will never be done. It would be an administrative revolution beyond capabilities. It vwould tear up tradition and mess with many a peripheral career .

It would, however, provide a mor serious and sound base for the emergence of Test cricketers.

Rob I wrote:

lardbucket wrote:

I think that's why England has gone backwards. They never accepted that they were a bit lucky; they honestly thought they'd reeached the pinnacle.

That's bollo lardy! Remember that they had won twelve of their last sixteen tests prior to that series, and lost just one. Then they hung onto the #2 position for a eighteen months after.

What happened was that all four of the main quicks got injured long-term and poor old Tres retired due to ill-health. Feltch tried to re-create the 2005 side, not realising that it wouldn't happen and that he should start rebuilding with new players such as Shah, SiBo & Monty.

When (re the very unfortunate Shah)?

Peter, JKL, Rob ... I was not inferring that luck was the only reason the English team won in 2005 -far from it. I only meant that a failure to recognise that 'luck' played a very significant part in that result may have played a part in England's subsequent inability to maintain those results. Continuing failure to recognise it doesn't help. The injuries and Trescothick's illness obviously played a part, too, but as much as Peter protests otherwise, there seems to me to have been a component of 'satisfied relief and rest, surveying the view from the pinnacle' on attaining that mountain-top.

I wouldn't call it arrogance or complacency, necessarily; but I think there was probably rest and prolonged celebration where there should have been goal re-setting.

This last result will shake up the team no end. How far are they from where they need to be? Miles off. Much work is required.

Australia also has a great deal to do.

lardbucket wrote:The injuries and Trescothick's illness obviously played a part, too, but as much as Peter protests otherwise, there seems to me to have been a component of 'satisfied relief and rest, surveying the view from the pinnacle' on attaining that mountain-top.

I wouldn't call it arrogance or complacency, necessarily; but I think there was probably rest and prolonged celebration where there should have been goal re-setting.

I think that they expected the Pakistanis to be a pushover late in 2005, and went in with injuries to Jones and Giles (don't laugh - the latter was very effective on his first tour of Pakistan).

I'm not laughing. I was gobsmacked by the 2nd innings collapse. There must be a fair amount of upheaval within the current squad, still, despite the claims of unity under Strauss. It puts a heap of pressure on him.

More and more I see Pietersen (well, his behaviour and comments) emerging as an English version of Lara ... a flawed genius ... a very good batsman (great in Lara's case), but perhaps a destructive influence within the team, undermining the confidence and performance of others. The West Indians sometimes seemed to perform better as a team without the brilliant batting of Lara ... a strange paradox. Is Pietersen bringing the other English players down?

It is clear that SA softened England up for India and the West Indies.

I think Flanders saw some of those "Lara" qualities in KP and tried to exploit them in the 06/07 Ashes ...his batting with the tail was questioned ...was he being selfish ...was he red ink hunting ...did he slog too early ...did he slog too late ...

also his "habit" of avoiding team huddles after a wicket that he did a couple of times

clearly just a blip