England 2005 v England 2009

Purely hypobaloneythetical of course - especially when it's some (but actually very few!) of the same players, only four years down the line - ......

..... but who would you expect to win if these two sides played each other?

(And don't say Bangladesh.)


It's fairly obvious what I am really getting at.


FWIW, I'd say - even without Fred - the present team is on balance slightly stronger. I might not have said that pre-Windies tour. In fact, I wouldn't. But - even bearing in mind WIndies' in places lamentable underachievements and flops, some continuing brittleness in the England team (Colly at 5 is high, and a genuine fast bowler is elusive), and the very poor track record of the team in the last three years - I think there are now definite signs of life and skill, and reasonable confidence to go with it, in the England squad/team at the moment.

2005 would wipe the floor with us. Simple...

Tres
Strauss
Bell
Vaughan
KP
Flintoff averaging 40 around this time.

All those players were at the top of their game, with Bell the only weak link. And our bowling attack was so much better - all averaging in the 20's

Can't believe you think the current side is better Pete

It certainly surprised me . . and all on the back of a couple of good tests against the Wiiindies

Is Tres so much more reliable than Cook?

Strauss seems to have recovered his poise - and wasn't consistently great in 05, IIRC.

Bell - well ...

Vaughan - yes. But he wasn't pulling up trees on a regular basis.

Pietersen - comes and goes. It's true you can't much improve on his Oval do.

I don't recall Fred doing that well with the bat, even then. Memory lapse perhaps.


What won the Ashes then was less the inconsistent, (only) in places scintillating batting than the "hunting pack of seamers", I think. Again, memory could be playing me tricks. If one bowler was off form in one innings or match, the other three seemed to be able to make up for it (and this is why I took issue with Gordon about the 4 v 5). It's there that there isn't the consistency now, it's true. But there are the makings of a decent seam attack. And we have a genuine spin bowler.

Oh, I dunno. Futile exercise. Should I ask Del to delete the thread?

Pete make a 2005 and 2009 combined XI to redeem yourself from anymore embarrasment.

I just think most importantly we were going into the Ashes in 2005 full of confidence in our own ability.

And as a fan I was watching each test entirely confident that we could get out of tricky situations.

For 2009, our batting is way too hit and miss & our top 2 bowler don't average the right side of 33. We've also lost every one of the last 4 series played against the big 3 sides - albeit the last 3 by the odd test.

I do believe we are capable of performing against Aus - but really predicting a result is a bit like guesswork. And the bottom line is we are ranked 5th and are playing the best team in t'world.

JKLever wrote:2005 would wipe the floor with us. Simple...

Tres
Strauss
Bell
Vaughan
KP
Flintoff averaging 40 around this time.

All those players were at the top of their game, with Bell the only weak link. And our bowling attack was so much better - all averaging in the 20's
Can't believe you think the current side is better Pete

The bowling's the big difference for mine. SiJo and a proper Fred were awesome all the time and the other two now and then. The current attack is like a box of chocolates

The fact we beat SAF and Windies away before white washing all comers from New Zealand to Bangladesh, say's how much confidence we had going into that 2005 series.


The momentum was clearly with us.

This time round, we had a wayward winter in the Caribbean and a 2 test series against the Windies AGAIN which really doesn't give us many signs that we can pull off the same display against the Aussies over a 5 test period.

Add to that the management troubles, an unknown opening venue, selection headaches and continued injury threats from all areas.

At the moment the ball is very much in Australia's court.

Agree Smerky, and whilst I think Aus may win by a clear 2 tests I do think we have some talent emerging and want to see us compete in this series.

Most interesting things to look out for, for me are -

1. Jimmykins - is the Anderson cycle broken and is he really an improved bowler? Not convinced, though if he bowls like he did at Durham he may well be.
2. Broad - I think Stuey is a top talent & a thinking cricketer who likes to give it to the oppo. He aint going to win us the Ashes (yet) but this series is a big test of his improvement too.
3. Bopara - albeit unfairly, until he scores against anyone other than WI he'll be unproven to a degree. Though we can all see the class - even if he struggles early we MUST stick by him. We gain nothing by bringing back Vaughan or Bell now.
4.Swann - a bit like Bops, a Windies basher for now but like Broad confident in his own game and the type of player we need to get us up the rankings.

Have to say Pete that this seems a bit ridiculous unless you are playing devil's advocate. The 2005 team would annihilate the current team.

The Anderson cycle will be closely analysed throughout the next couple of months.


Same with Broad. This is where these guys really need to stand up and be counted.

If they had any brains, they'd be wary of guys like Mahmood or Woakes (who have been making waves in recent months).

Personally, I'd be happy to see Swann wrapping up every Australian innings.

DJ_Smerk wrote:
If they had any brains, they'd be wary of guys like Mahmood

See, I think Broad sh!ts over the Sajman in terms of mental toughness and cricketing intelligence.

I reckon that too. Just I'm expecting more selection crapulations when they add Saj to the 4th test squad...

Even worse, he's in the 1st squad as 12th man.



That would be horrific.

England 2005 would beat England 2009 - just.

Aus 2005 would obliterate Aus 2009.

England 2005 wins hands down.

The bowling attack does it for me. Simon Jones was on fire, Flintoff was at his best, Harmison was intimidating without being completely wayward, and Hoggard was giving the Aussies problems with his swingers. That leaves Ashley Giles... oh well, no attack's perfect.

Flintoff was also in good batting form, ensuring that a five-man attack didn't weaken the batting.

Trescothick was helping England get off to flyers, putting Australia on the back foot. Strauss and Pietersen were also in good touch. Bell was a liability and should have been left out of the team for Thorpe, but such is life.

And let's not forget Vaughan's skill as captain. He was very good and showed Ponting up for the muppet that he is.

Eng'05 would certainly whitewash Aus'09.

Are mints allowed?

The 2005 team was actually a bit special. Everything clicked, and everyone was near enough at the top of their game. Let's not forget that England won 7 (?) test series in a row during that golden period.

The current team has won one series in a row....Against a disinterested West Indies team. In England. In May.

Knowing Aus luck under Ponting a bowler will step on a ball but it won't be Bung it'll be Mitch.

Combined XI (2005 form v 2009 form): -

Tres - 2005
Strauss - Even
Vaughan - 2005
KP - 2005
Colly - 2009
Flintoff - 2005
GoJo+ - 2005
Broad - 2009
Swann - 2009
Hoggard - 2005
Jones - 2005

2005 beats 2009 by 7 cricketers to 3 with one tie.

GoJo vs Prior


That's a tough one...

DJ_Smerk wrote:GoJo vs Prior


That's a tough one...

Aye. A dinger versus a donger.

Prior will make (even) more mistakes with the gloves, and get found out as a batsman.

Prior by a country mile. Jones's keeping was just as bad as Prior's, but Prior averages 20 runs more with the bat than Jones did.

Why do people knock Prior's batting? He looks all class whenever I see him play. If you ignore his keeping and focus solely on his batting, it's hard to fault him.