England v India, 2nd Test, Trent Bridge, 29 Jul-2 Aug, 2011

Dello wrote:

Gary 111 wrote:

embee wrote:

Brass Monkey wrote:Yeah, but f'rinstance 2005 wouldn't have been as good had Warne & Hayden not played etc. It's not as good in some ways.

You mean like McGrath missing the two tests that England won in that series ...dont think its bothered too many poms

No it didn't. Partly because that was the only injury Australia had to contend with in the entire series, and also our performance in other games. McGrath bowled very well using the Lords slope, but in the other 4 innings he played Aus didn't once bowl England out for under 300. His bowling 0/86, 5/115 (declaration wickets), 2/72 & 3/85. If Warne had missed Trent Bridge and The Oval it would have felt more shallow, because he was incredible that series. Maybe McGrath was carrying an injury - maybe England had his measure on flatter wickets that series. It almost worked out better for Aus, if Kasprowicz glove had evaded Jones's dive he would have led Aus to victory with an incredible 60 run final wicket partnership. Its unlikely McGrath could have matched that.

It also didn't bother the Poms as it was about time Australia picked up a knock or two, after England's hilariously feeble tour of Oz in 2003 during which Simon Jones, Ashley Giles, John Crawley, Alex Tudor, Chris Silverwood and Alec Stewart were injured in combat (actually, Harmison broke Gilo in the nets). Andrew Flintoff and Darren Gough, though selected to tour in spite of injury concerns, never made it onto the field. And Graham Thorpe withdrew from the squad for personal reasons before the series started.

Yep - it was carnage. The Aussies can whinge all they like about Gwen's wickle ankwle - we lost NINE players! What a shambles.

Dello wrote:

Gary 111 wrote:

embee wrote:

Brass Monkey wrote:Yeah, but f'rinstance 2005 wouldn't have been as good had Warne & Hayden not played etc. It's not as good in some ways.

You mean like McGrath missing the two tests that England won in that series ...dont think its bothered too many poms

No it didn't. Partly because that was the only injury Australia had to contend with in the entire series, and also our performance in other games. McGrath bowled very well using the Lords slope, but in the other 4 innings he played Aus didn't once bowl England out for under 300. His bowling 0/86, 5/115 (declaration wickets), 2/72 & 3/85. If Warne had missed Trent Bridge and The Oval it would have felt more shallow, because he was incredible that series. Maybe McGrath was carrying an injury - maybe England had his measure on flatter wickets that series. It almost worked out better for Aus, if Kasprowicz glove had evaded Jones's dive he would have led Aus to victory with an incredible 60 run final wicket partnership. Its unlikely McGrath could have matched that.

It also didn't bother the Poms as it was about time Australia picked up a knock or two, after England's hilariously feeble tour of Oz in 2003 during which Simon Jones, Ashley Giles, John Crawley, Alex Tudor, Chris Silverwood and Alec Stewart were injured in combat (actually, Harmison broke Gilo in the nets). Andrew Flintoff and Darren Gough, though selected to tour in spite of injury concerns, never made it onto the field. And Graham Thorpe withdrew from the squad for personal reasons before the series started.

Yep - it was carnage. The Aussies can whinge all they like about Gwen's wickle ankwle - we lost NINE players! What a shambles.

horace wrote:

Dello wrote:

Gary 111 wrote:

embee wrote:

Brass Monkey wrote:Yeah, but f'rinstance 2005 wouldn't have been as good had Warne & Hayden not played etc. It's not as good in some ways.

You mean like McGrath missing the two tests that England won in that series ...dont think its bothered too many poms

No it didn't. Partly because that was the only injury Australia had to contend with in the entire series, and also our performance in other games. McGrath bowled very well using the Lords slope, but in the other 4 innings he played Aus didn't once bowl England out for under 300. His bowling 0/86, 5/115 (declaration wickets), 2/72 & 3/85. If Warne had missed Trent Bridge and The Oval it would have felt more shallow, because he was incredible that series. Maybe McGrath was carrying an injury - maybe England had his measure on flatter wickets that series. It almost worked out better for Aus, if Kasprowicz glove had evaded Jones's dive he would have led Aus to victory with an incredible 60 run final wicket partnership. Its unlikely McGrath could have matched that.

It also didn't bother the Poms as it was about time Australia picked up a knock or two, after England's hilariously feeble tour of Oz in 2003 during which Simon Jones, Ashley Giles, John Crawley, Alex Tudor, Chris Silverwood and Alec Stewart were injured in combat (actually, Harmison broke Gilo in the nets). Andrew Flintoff and Darren Gough, though selected to tour in spite of injury concerns, never made it onto the field. And Graham Thorpe withdrew from the squad for personal reasons before the series started.

Yep - it was carnage. The Aussies can whinge all they like about Gwen's wickle ankwle - we lost NINE players! What a shambles.

Dello - you are conveniently ignoring the fact that most of the above poms were either past it (gough and thorpe), not yet up to it (Freddie, sijo) or immutably gash - stewart, tudor, Silverwood, Creepy (ffs), Giles (ffs) etc

Dello wrote:

horace wrote:

Dello wrote:

Gary 111 wrote:

embee wrote:

Brass Monkey wrote:Yeah, but f'rinstance 2005 wouldn't have been as good had Warne & Hayden not played etc. It's not as good in some ways.

You mean like McGrath missing the two tests that England won in that series ...dont think its bothered too many poms

No it didn't. Partly because that was the only injury Australia had to contend with in the entire series, and also our performance in other games. McGrath bowled very well using the Lords slope, but in the other 4 innings he played Aus didn't once bowl England out for under 300. His bowling 0/86, 5/115 (declaration wickets), 2/72 & 3/85. If Warne had missed Trent Bridge and The Oval it would have felt more shallow, because he was incredible that series. Maybe McGrath was carrying an injury - maybe England had his measure on flatter wickets that series. It almost worked out better for Aus, if Kasprowicz glove had evaded Jones's dive he would have led Aus to victory with an incredible 60 run final wicket partnership. Its unlikely McGrath could have matched that.

It also didn't bother the Poms as it was about time Australia picked up a knock or two, after England's hilariously feeble tour of Oz in 2003 during which Simon Jones, Ashley Giles, John Crawley, Alex Tudor, Chris Silverwood and Alec Stewart were injured in combat (actually, Harmison broke Gilo in the nets). Andrew Flintoff and Darren Gough, though selected to tour in spite of injury concerns, never made it onto the field. And Graham Thorpe withdrew from the squad for personal reasons before the series started.

Yep - it was carnage. The Aussies can whinge all they like about Gwen's wickle ankwle - we lost NINE players! What a shambles.

Dello - you are conveniently ignoring the fact that most of the above poms were either past it (gough and thorpe), not yet up to it (Freddie, sijo) or immutably gash - stewart, tudor, Silverwood, Creepy (ffs), Giles (ffs) etc

Not ignoring the "fact". It's irrelevant. England were weakened due to the absence of not just a number of first choice players, but the next cabs off the rank too.

So, no, there wasn't much sense of the 2005 Ashes win being cheapened by McGrath's self-inflicted injury. We'd had more than our fair share of Ashes misfortune, thanks.