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

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.

I thought Zim would be the first in, saying "What? Not even got any farking pride, Poms?!" or summat of the sort.

Whereas you seem to have got my point loud and clear, T.

In fact it does hurt. You want your team, and people representing your country to win, even if they were a bunch of grubs, qunts, snooty arseholes and vastly overpaid lowlifes (I didn't say that - well, not about the cricket).

But melodramatic raiment-rending teacup-throwing rattle-tossing stuff goes a bit over the top and - crucially - misses the point(s), I think.

And FWIW, I don't think the present England side is rubbish. Just not quite good enough in about four positions, and (still!!) with a bit too much of a tendency to sag when the tide turns. That's worrying enough. But I am not about to commit hara-kiri at the national/personal dishonour, a la Mishima.

Well, not yet. ...

English cricket is not in criris. They have the fundamentals to a pretty good team,. Under KP they need another year to hit their full potential. The preparation and the lead up to the Chennai test was chaotic plus they were facing a strong Indian team on home soil heavily pumped by the Bombay tragedy.

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.

None of the personell has really changed in the last 2 years. They've been cruising by to be honest. The batsmen point to their 40+ averages, and the bowlers get by on their reputations, and a few performances against the West Indies and New Zealand.

Has anyone actually improved in the last 2 years? Ali Cook? Is he a better player now than he was when he made his test debut? Monty? James Anderson? Harmison? Are any of these guys actually moving forward? The answer is no, and for me the coaching staff has to accept a big portion of the blame. Andy Flower was a great cricketer and is a great bloke, but i'm starting to think he's a pretty average batting coach, and we all know that Peter Moores is a weak as cat piss ECB yes man.

There is talent there, but it's either being ignored (Shah) or mishandled (Cook, Anderson, Panesar, Harmison....)

Oh, and then there's the selectors who selected an Aussie who no one had ever heard of ahead of several blokes who would give their right testicle to represent England.

Henry 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.

Yes Trev, you sad ass muncher. Must be farqqing hard to read a reasoned analysis, eh? INstead of the continual bleating and whining that you generate.

Reasoned analysis? You actually seem convinced that Aus didn't rely on a huge contribution from Warne to stay in the series. Without him you guys would have been royally f*cked, and you know it. So don't give me this weepy,"But it was the umpires! And Glenn Mcgrath trod on a cricket ball! " nonsense.

Warne was the difference between 2-1 and 4-1.

You deluded fuck'wit. I think you might need to get your head examined.

You actually seem convinced that Aus didn't rely on a huge contribution from Warne to stay in the series. Without him you guys would have been royally f*cked, and you know it.

WTF? Haven't seen the old 'you had a champ in your side so that doesn't count' argument from anyone other than a subi. Good work Mudgekins.

I think I've got under his skin. Which is not entirely a good thing. Don't know what I might catch.

At the risk of appearing to avoid the issue, I would say the matter is very complex and actually I disagree with the dining out hypothesis although the rest of Dello's analysis of the losses of personnel is very relevant.

They were tremendously successful in the 18 months 2 years leading up to Ashes 2005 and clearly bonded+++++ as a team such that they were way more than the sum of the parts...as most successful teams are. Have to attribute that to Fat Felch and Vorn wit a bit of Nasser legacy (in terms of a bit of steel and "Thank Gawd this dude Vawn is better than that qunt Naz).

Within a couple of matches after Sept 2005 the team was almost unrecognisable and Vawn had gawn indefinitely which i think left them ruderless (fark off Merlin before you retort with you Vawn hatred; I think this is a fair point for the team at that time given their history.)

England floundered in Summer 2006 without Vawn. Flintoff lost a home test to Sri Lanka when it was in our pocket. Felch now started to appear too rigid to think and progress creatively out of this cul de sac. i have some sympathy with this. All his creative efforts had gone into creating this fantastic "TEAM" 2004-2005 which was then decimated by lady luck and fickle fortune.

Then there was selectorial ineptitude and abuse which led to the Ashes 2006/7 debacle whitewash. I think there are still echos from there. Strauss has maybe only just overcome them in the last few days.

Colly scored a double ton in a losing cause and has hardly been the same since (until 2 days ago.)

There was then the ousting of Fat Felch (probably warranted, but remember he coached England into comprehensively beating Pakistan in England in a Test series) and then a dodgy appointments process for the successor coach.

Vawn returned at some point, but hopelessly out of form with the bat and thus lost credibility as a captain.

Other players for whatever reason picked up that they could get away without performing consistently, such that the odd good/very good performance would save them rather than being required to deliver consistently.

In short, things managerially and personnel-wise have conspired. The management should have prevented such a conspiracy, but of course their snouts are in the trough.

Poor, fuzzy thinking. A lack of definition and definitive action from management have left the players drifting.

Some will argue that the players should have taken the initiative...pride.....paid enough etc. But the fact is, once you put a heavy management structure in, the absolution of responsibility is inevitable. Thus Warne's dislike of coaches.

I think the talent available to England has been a bit less than one would like and thus not quite enough competition for places. Maybe this explains in part why this England team which i think has a hell of a lot of potential talent has greatly underachieved.

Poor or absent direction. Mentally weak or lost. Not enough competition.

Henry wrote:Reasoned analysis? You actually seem convinced that Aus didn't rely on a huge contribution from Warne to stay in the series. Without him you guys would have been royally f*cked, and you know it. So don't give me this weepy,"But it was the umpires! And Glenn Mcgrath trod on a cricket ball! " nonsense.

Warne was the difference between 2-1 and 4-1.

Yup, he did help us out at the Oval when we were staring defeat in the face. And his wonderful 156 at OT was even better.

Dello wrote:

tac wrote:You put a fit Simon Jones back in the current team and they would have won this test . . .

Simon Jones, whose reputation was built - and still remains built - on two and a half Tests' worth of bowling.

You might be interested to learn that, when playing for England A, Simon Jones was part of a bowling attack that allowed a team of Indian second XI players chase down over 503 to win (for the loss of just four wickets) on the final day of a FC match in the Duleep Trophy.

http://cricketarchive.com/Archive/Scorecards/79/79129.html

13.5 overs (he went off injured...) for 0/89...

Sorry, Dello, I meant a fit SJ bowling as he did in that Ashes series . . .

He might have been shite every other time he bowled but he and Freddy did the job that series. Now Freddy only as Jimmikns and a much less effective Harmi to lend him support . . .

I don't agree with the Subject. I don't think England cricket is in ruins: I'd consider them to still be one of the strong teams in Test cricket, possibly better than the one that won the 2005 Ashes.

They let this match get away from them in the last four sessions: I think it is possible that KP has a Ponting-style frailty of mind.

OP Tipping wrote:I think it is possible that KP has a Ponting-style frailty of mind.

Ouch!

OP Tipping wrote:I don't agree with the Subject. I don't think England cricket is in ruins: I'd consider them to still be one of the strong teams in Test cricket, possibly better than the one that won the 2005 Ashes.

They let this match get away from them in the last four sessions: I think it is possible that KP has a Ponting-style frailty of mind.

Meh, they simply dismissed Dravid too quickly . . . let him bat 25 overs and no way the subis would have got the runs . . .

tac wrote:

OP Tipping wrote:I don't agree with the Subject. I don't think England cricket is in ruins: I'd consider them to still be one of the strong teams in Test cricket, possibly better than the one that won the 2005 Ashes.

They let this match get away from them in the last four sessions: I think it is possible that KP has a Ponting-style frailty of mind.

Meh, they simply dismissed Dravid too quickly . . . let him bat 25 overs and no way the subis would have got the runs . . .

As the saying goes on this board....Sage!

Josh Carney wrote:English cricket is not in criris. They have the fundamentals to a pretty good team,. Under KP they need another year to hit their full potential. The preparation and the lead up to the Chennai test was chaotic plus they were facing a strong Indian team on home soil heavily pumped by the Bombay tragedy.

they have had decent players for a while now but they don't seem to click, since the Ashes series their away record has been horrible and not that great in England either.

Well it's all relative- England cricket's far better off than cricket in the Windies and Pakistan. Still, I've got no faith in those running English cricket on and off the field- if ever there's an example of people always eventually being promoted beyond their level of competency the ECB's an object lesson.

As well as Ian Bell obviously it's all about county cricket- it doesn't even try to create a level of competition to prepare English players for international cricket. Despite everything even just last season you had teams of kolpakers playing half-arsed 4 day cricket against each other in front of a handful of mentals, the nearly dead and a curiousy large number of crows.

Thing is the ECB is the counties- they're not separate entities, county chairmen sit on the board and nothing can be done to reform the game without Derbyshire's total agreement. So England will always be average with moderate highs and terrible lows.

So unless I become the fascist dictator of this fair country and have all those parasitic county b*stards shot Engish cricket will never conquer the world.

If I was lord protector btw I would turn the rose bowl into a great big f*ck off gulag for Shaun Udal, Peter Moores and their like. Giles Clarke would have already been hung, drawn and quartered and there would be an effigy of him forever burning a-top London bridge.

Curiously my rule would otherwise be incredibly benevolent and progressive and I would be known in history as Eric the good and mostly sane.

An enu in charge of English cricket and .. well, England. I think I like it.

Eric Air Emu wrote:Well it's all relative- England cricket's far better off than cricket in the Windies and Pakistan. Still, I've got no faith in those running English cricket on and off the field- if ever there's an example of people always eventually being promoted beyond their level of competency the ECB's an object lesson.

As well as Ian Bell obviously it's all about county cricket- it doesn't even try to create a level of competition to prepare English players for international cricket. Despite everything even just last season you had teams of kolpakers playing half-arsed 4 day cricket against each other in front of a handful of mentals, the nearly dead and a curiousy large number of crows.

Thing is the ECB is the counties- they're not separate entities, county chairmen sit on the board and nothing can be done to reform the game without Derbyshire's total agreement. So England will always be average with moderate highs and terrible lows.

So unless I become the fascist dictator of this fair country and have all those parasitic county b*stards shot Engish cricket will never conquer the world.

If I was lord protector btw I would turn the rose bowl into a great big f*ck off gulag for Shaun Udal, Peter Moores and their like. Giles Clarke would have already been hung, drawn and quartered and there would be an effigy of him forever burning a-top London bridge.

Curiously my rule would otherwise be incredibly benevolent and progressive and I would be known in history as Eric the good and mostly sane.

I'd vote for you. Wouldn't even need to be at gun point.

Would you want a great big gulag on your doorstep?

Actually come to think of it, it'll be a bugger to transport prisoners all the way out there. I'll put them in Wales instead.

Eric Air Emu wrote: nothing can be done to reform the game without Derbyshire's total agreement. So England will always be average with moderate highs and terrible lows.

*Sigh*

Eric Air Emu wrote:Would you want a great big gulag on your doorstep?

Mark Nicholas lives close by anyway. Or he used to. He's probably Australian now, throwing shrimps on barbies and wearing g-strings on his feet.