A fair assessment of why England can retain the Ashes

skully wrote:A fair call, A. We all know that Aus is hard to beat on home soil under much more benign atmospheric and pitch conditions (in terms of sideways movement).

JKL (and others) are of the view that England's attack cannot dismiss Aus twice often enough to retain the Ashes. I guess the counter question is can Aus's attack dismiss the Poms twice often enough to regain the urn?

I think Bolly, Milf, maybe Sids and occasionally Midge (on a good day) have enough firepower to win a couple of Tests. Fingers crossed.

For England much will depend on Swanny.

Don't forget the fielding - this is the best slip cordon I've seen in England colours for a long, long time - and Anderson is one of the best outfielders in the business.

The thing about Swann is that he gives the ball a real rip and gets turn/bounce on pitches not normally thought to aid spinners.

We'll almost certainly start the series with four bowlers - Jimmy, Swanny, Finn and Broad. My concern would be what Jimmy will do when the ball stops swinging (if it does at all) - if he doesn't have a plan B, we will, effectively, be down to a three-man attack.

If the Anderson cycle gets out of sync, it wouldn't surprise me if he was replaced by Shazhad who can reverse it both ways at a decent pace.

As for the batting, only Cook is a real concern - not just because of his current form, but because he averages under 27 agains Oz. Even allowing for this, I still expect him to be in the side at the Gabba.

Aye Bas. Hopefully Aus can put it's best foot forward and make for a classic Ashes. We are an order of magnitude weaker than we were when we last tried to and succeeded in regaining the Ashes. As Merls points out, no TGM, tgm, Gilly, Dossie, NLWL, Marto, and others.

taipan wrote:

skully wrote:Hope you're right, taips. A long tour under the blazing Aus sun normally has the Poms struggling but on paper they have a pretty fair arsenal.

I fear Strauss, Colly, Swanny and maybe Trott, KP and Prior.

Only 4 of those are SA born

Of course, no Englishman has ever represented SA

skully wrote:

Yes, I was fully aware of this.

Surprising we have any English cricketers at all given that so few schools actually play it.

Can you lend us some? Maybe that Irishman if you don't need him?

No, he's our questionable Irish import, find your own.

"Oi've ahlways dreemed of playin fer Ngland since Oi were a wee boy on te streets a Dubblin"

You could just take Johnston back...

Who's he then?

http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/content/player/6038.html

Plays for Ireland.

Of course [slaps forhead]. I did know that. The big ex-Aussie done good at the 2007 WC.

skully wrote:

Merlin wrote:They're idiots - the lot of them.

F**king Inane and repetitive dirges all day long can blow your brain away if seated a few rows from the constsnt din.

I think you've just summed up the Emperor's hatred of said mob.

Hatred? That's a bit strong, innit? Just because I'd like to see them all crushed to death under a collapsing grandstand, or some similar departure from the mortal coil...

embee wrote:As interesting as the article was ...Australia's chances are only dependent upon themselves ...

No injuries ...especially to Punter's and Mitch's Brain ...and a team that is prepared to play Test Cricket for 5 days at a time will beat anything the Poms can throw at us.

Meh, that's a silly and rather arrogant argument. England could say the same thing. If everything goes right and no one gets injured we'll beat the Aussies. But this is sport. Both teams will have setbacks.

Clamson wrote:

taipan wrote:

skully wrote:Hope you're right, taips. A long tour under the blazing Aus sun normally has the Poms struggling but on paper they have a pretty fair arsenal.

I fear Strauss, Colly, Swanny and maybe Trott, KP and Prior.

Only 4 of those are SA born

Of course, no Englishman has ever represented SA

Not in living memory as far as I can recall Clam.

BTW school cricket isn't that great in certain areas here, either.

embee wrote:As interesting as the article was ...Australia's chances are only dependent upon themselves ...

No injuries ...especially to Punter's and Mitch's Brain ...and a team that is prepared to play Test Cricket for 5 days at a time will beat anything the Poms can throw at us.

You had better hope that your bowlers offer up something a damn sight better than they served up at Headsingley. If they don't - you're fooked.

Basil wrote:

embee wrote:As interesting as the article was ...Australia's chances are only dependent upon themselves ...

No injuries ...especially to Punter's and Mitch's Brain ...and a team that is prepared to play Test Cricket for 5 days at a time will beat anything the Poms can throw at us.

You had better hope that your bowlers offer up something a damn sight better than they served up at Headsingley. If they don't - you're fooked.

I think "not bowling sh!t" was implied in what I wrote

Basil wrote:You had better hope that your bowlers offer up something a damn sight better than they served up at Headsingley. If they don't - you're fooked.

OI thought it was a large Pakistani expat community there, not Indians.

Fair play to Skully...

taipan wrote:

skully wrote:Hope you're right, taips. A long tour under the blazing Aus sun normally has the Poms struggling but on paper they have a pretty fair arsenal.

I fear Strauss, Colly, Swanny and maybe Trott, KP and Prior.

Only 4 of those are SA born

Yup, those were the only ones to fear! Good thing the faster bowlers or Cook didn't learn their cricket in SA, or they might have given you some trouble too.

Thanks for reviving this thread JKL, it really is very enjoyable reading.

Zat, on August 14th, wrote:'why England can retain the Ashes'

Because they're a side that's got form, confidence, and stability.

Australia is a side that lost its last Test against Pak-i-f*cking-stan, and has tests in India in the lead-up, id captained by a moron, coached by a dill, and is selected by numbskulls, with players in form unable to get in, and players in poor form unlikely to be dropped.

And [own trumpet] I was right [/own trumpet].

Zat wrote:

Zat, on August 14th, wrote:'why England can retain the Ashes'

Because they're a side that's got form, confidence, and stability.

Australia is a side that lost its last Test against Pak-i-f*cking-stan, and has tests in India in the lead-up, id captained by a moron, coached by a dill, and is selected by numbskulls, with players in form unable to get in, and players in poor form unlikely to be dropped.

And [own trumpet] I was right [/own trumpet].

Damn, I wish I was right.

Get ****** vilky.