Future Ashes series in England 2013, then 2016...?

According to cricinfo.

So it's official, the Ashes moves in the cycle?

Moving the cycle or shortening it? A 3-year cycle would make sense in a way as the series would work out at roughly even 18-month intervals, but would be a struggle to fit in all the other countries - maybe the feeling is that some of them will have virtually given up playing Tests by then.

Still I think Ashes series in England are best in odd numbered years when there aren't the same level of major sporting events competing for public attention during the summer.

That's what I was thinking. 2016 is an Olympic year.

I'm pretty sure they're moving the Ashes a year forward in the cycle.

I think they'd be better off keeping the English leg unchanged (where it doesn't have to compete with football tournaments) and delaying the Australian leg by a year.

At the moment we have 13 months from the end of the English home series until the start of the Australian home series.

We then have a 30 month gap between the end of the Australian leg and the start of the matches in England.

If you were to move the Australian leg to 2011/12 then you'd have a 25 month gap between the England and Australian legs and an 18 month gap between the Australian and English legs.

At the moment the Australian series comes too soon and the English series doesn't come soon enough.

Thanks Hass. I vaguely recall some talk about changing the Ashes spot in the cycle, but I thought it was the Aus leg that was going to change, because England were tired of having to back up for World Cups relatively quickly after the Ashes, hence my surprise.

Still, moving one of the legs isn't such a bad idea, now if they could just get it back to a proper six-match series...

Is this anything like the Anderson Cycle?

skully wrote:Is this anything like the Anderson Cycle?

No, this cycle is broken on the 'England are sh!thouse' gear.

The last time the four-year ashes cycle was broken in England was 1977. That will be 39 years by 2016 with 9 successive four-year intervals.

There had never been more than 3 four-year intervals in a row before that (1926-30-34-38). Maybe it's about time.

FWIW, There were 5 successive two-year intervals (1880-1882-1884-1886-1888-1890) followed by 5 successive three-year intervals (1890-1893-1896-1899-1902-1905). From 1905 to 1977 things were all over the shop with 3,4,5,9 and 10 year intervals.

Blame Willie & Adolf for the last intervals....

JKLever wrote:Blame Willie & Adolf for the last intervals....

Qunts.

To be fair, they probably hadn't been told about cricket.

Zat wrote:According to cricinfo.

So it's official, the Ashes moves in the cycle?

Check the link you've provided Zat. It is:

http://www.flamingbails.com/post.forum?mode=newtopic&f=1

not cricinfo!

ten years after wrote:To be fair, they probably hadn't been told about cricket.

Hypothesis: The two world wars of the 20th century would have been avoided had Germany played cricket.

Discuss.

Hass wrote:

ten years after wrote:To be fair, they probably hadn't been told about cricket.

Hypothesis: The two world wars of the 20th century would have been avoided had Germany played cricket.

Discuss.

Ha. Many years ago I was playing in Kent, and a German tourist coach pulled up at the pub outside. One guy got out on to the roof, stood there for a couple of moments and then called across the field "Vot for you play zis stupid game?".

Shoeshine wrote:

Hass wrote:

ten years after wrote:To be fair, they probably hadn't been told about cricket.

Hypothesis: The two world wars of the 20th century would have been avoided had Germany played cricket.

Discuss.

Ha. Many years ago I was playing in Kent, and a German tourist coach pulled up at the pub outside. One guy got out on to the roof, stood there for a couple of moments and then called across the field "Vot for you play zis stupid game?".

I hope you told them that we beat them twice at their own stupid game!

Basil wrote:

Shoeshine wrote:

Hass wrote:

ten years after wrote:To be fair, they probably hadn't been told about cricket.

Hypothesis: The two world wars of the 20th century would have been avoided had Germany played cricket.

Discuss.

Ha. Many years ago I was playing in Kent, and a German tourist coach pulled up at the pub outside. One guy got out on to the roof, stood there for a couple of moments and then called across the field "Vot for you play zis stupid game?".

I hope you told them that we beat them twice at their own stupid game!

Not quite, though one of my team-mates shouted back - and I quote "If you'd won the war, YOU would be playing this stupid game".

Chandan wrote:

Zat wrote:According to cricinfo.

So it's official, the Ashes moves in the cycle?

Check the link you've provided Zat. It is:

http://www.flamingbails.com/post.forum?mode=newtopic&f=1

not cricinfo!

Well, shit. I'll fix that when I have a few minutes to find the link...

Hass wrote:

ten years after wrote:To be fair, they probably hadn't been told about cricket.

Hypothesis: The two world wars of the 20th century would have been avoided had Germany played cricket.

Discuss.

The disturbing thought is that they may have turned out alot better at it had they played cricket.

Link in OP now fixed.

Good to see Cardiff is in the ECB's thoughts with some Sri Lanka test matches.

Why is that good?

Got an email from the WACA today that suggested there will be an Ashes series in 2010/11 and 2013/14...so are we entering a 3 year Ashes cycle?

You never know.

Invader Zim wrote:Got an email from the WACA today that suggested there will be an Ashes series in 2010/11 and 2013/14...so are we entering a 3 year Ashes cycle?

Rather a 3 year Ashes cycle than swanning around the dustbowls on the sub continent dodging Delhi-belly and Kolcutta-crabs.
Anyway, with Pak a no-go area for the foreseeable future, guess they've got to plug the programme's gaps.

Zat wrote:That's what I was thinking. 2016 is an Olympic year.

Idiot.

The Ashes is more popular.