The Ashes

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by ED Classic

Clark is an awesome bowler, hillfanhaus looking good lately but i think going forward i would be looking at johnson over lee as he is our future, and good lefties dont come along all the time. He could easily have had another couple of wickets in this series with the right ump and yoi can bet England studied him more than any of our bowlers

very true....but right now in england, he has disapointed. Not need to crucify the bloke, he has done well and will do well for australia long term. He should have been dropped after cardiff IMO. If lee was fit, i'd say he would have. I don't think the selectors liked the idea of clark in the side without a strong 'strike bowler' that could bang them in. Just my theory....hasn't really proved to be the case here anyway since johnson only got the one wicket

[prydey]

katich gone for 0. still a lot to offer the bowlers in this pitch.

[prydey]

i know i'm risking speaking too soon, but i just love it when the aussies play hard aggressive bullish cricket. knock em over for 102 and then come out and bat at over 8 an over.

english bowlers have got it wrong. can't bounce out aussies. we know how to play on a bouncy deck.

[prydey]

i have a serious question regarding the laws of the game. it is regarding the clarke decision at the end where he fended a bouncer off with his wrist/glove and given not out.

personally i don't have a problem with the decision. it caught a piece of his inner, rather than the glove itself. how far up the arm does the ball need to hit before it stops being glove. if you have gloves that have a longish elastic bit around the wrist are you really at a disadvantage compared to gloves that finish earlier. what about when you wear a long sleeve top that covers all that. had clarke had a long sleeve top on where does the glove stop if you can't actually see it.

if it comes off a part of the glove that is holding the bat handle, thats fine but does the law spell it out in any detail or was clark 'out' in the eyes of the law?

if that happened when the challenge system is in place, and clarke was given out and he challenged it, would the decision have been upheld (out) or overturned (not out). clarke obviously felt it come off the wrist.

[gtxb67]

i believe (not sure but) that it is the hand that matters - the part of your body that is protecting the handle of the bat. much like an lbw decision. if the glove stopped the ball from hitting the bat, then it is considered to be part of the bat

it is my understanding that kasper should not have been given out in the 2nd test of the 2005 ashes series, because although the ball hit his glove, the glove/hand in question was not attached to the bat

[gcg2503]

I watched last night from when England was 0/58 till the end when they lost 5 wickets

Loved it! Shame about the dropped catch on the last ball though :(

I wasnt fussed that there was an erroneous lbw decision that went our way. The Aussies are still way behind on dodgy decisions

[prydey]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

it is my understanding that kasper should not have been given out in the 2nd test of the 2005 ashes series, because although the ball hit his glove, the glove/hand in question was not attached to the bat

very true. the umpires will always make mistakes, just some of them hurt a lot more than others.

this will be the last test without the challenge system i believe.

Originally Posted by gcg2503

I wasnt fussed that there was an erroneous lbw decision that went our way. The Aussies are still way behind on dodgy decisions

you know its true when even the british commentators are saying the aussies are still in front as far as dodgy decisions.

[DBourne]

Originally Posted by prydey

i have a serious question regarding the laws of the game. it is regarding the clarke decision at the end where he fended a bouncer off with his wrist/glove and given not out.

personally i don't have a problem with the decision. it caught a piece of his inner, rather than the glove itself. how far up the arm does the ball need to hit before it stops being glove.

any material attached to the glove (excluding shirts, arm guards, sweatbands) is part of the glove and if the ball hits it, can be given out caught.

You are correct that if the player has the gloves with the massive sweat band attached that they are putting themselves at a disadvantage.

[gtxb67]

at least we know our bowlers are back - i rathered the imposters that masqueraded as our guys on the first 2 days though

[vztrt]

Well we won by an innings and 80 runs.

Scorecard for people that would like to check it out in more detail.
http://www.cricinfo.com/engvaus2009/...ch/345973.html

[prydey]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

at least we know our bowlers are back - i rathered the imposters that masqueraded as our guys on the first 2 days though

the bowlers were always going to get a bit of stick today. there was no pressure on the eng tail end. the game was going to be won by australia so they may as well just free their arms and have a swing.

the selectors have real problem now heading to the oval. from what i've heard you should play a specialist spinner there which means one of the pace guys will have to step aside. maybe aust. will make do with north, clarke and katich for the spin.

very emphatic win. 2.5 days!!

[itchy brother]

Originally Posted by prydey

very emphatic win. 2.5 days!!

A quick game is a good game!
I thought that the Aussies dragged it out a bit though! :

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by prydey

the bowlers were always going to get a bit of stick today. there was no pressure on the eng tail end. the game was going to be won by australia so they may as well just free their arms and have a swing.

the selectors have real problem now heading to the oval. from what i've heard you should play a specialist spinner there which means one of the pace guys will have to step aside. maybe aust. will make do with north, clarke and katich for the spin.

very emphatic win. 2.5 days!!

you are right, the batsmen had nothing to lose and their tail has started wagging as of late. the overs i saw though were trash - i mean 3 overs for 49 runs in a test match - a little too much trash was bowled

however as you suggested - 2.5 days for an innings + victory, i shouldn't be complaining at all

[prydey]

flintoff will be back for the oval test apparently. he has also come out and said he was fit for headingly but england didn't want him. strauss said he needed to be confident flintoff could bowl at least 15 overs a day and that wasn't garaunteed so they went without him. if they do pick him, and he's not 100%, that will only help us out i think. the team do lift when he's in though.

also staggering news, the selectors are looking at dropping clark to get hauritz back in, given the oval is spin friendly. the guy only just gets in, makes a big difference and then is looking at the sidelines again. they made the comment that the other bowlers got more wickets and are bowling better but maybe that is because there is a guy at the other end making it difficult to get runs. unbelievable!!

[prydey]

highlights here
http://www.sbs.com.au/ashes/

unchanged squad for the aussies has worked for them on day 1. the runs flowed though and at times looked like it could get ugly but england still seem to lack that mental toughness to go on and make big individual scores.

need to knock over the last 2 wickets quickly. day 2 is often the best for batting so lets hope we can get in early and make hay.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by prydey

highlights here
http://www.sbs.com.au/ashes/

unchanged squad for the aussies has worked for them on day 1. the runs flowed though and at times looked like it could get ugly but england still seem to lack that mental toughness to go on and make big individual scores.

need to knock over the last 2 wickets quickly. day 2 is often the best for batting so lets hope we can get in early and make hay.

Problem is that pitch is stuffed, so their score isn't that bad.

[prydey]

the ball was going through the surface a bit which is pretty ordinary on day 1 but they still managed to rattle along at close to 4 an over and sometimes more. i think they let themselves down with poor shot selection and chasing too many balls. our bowlers deserve some credit but they weren't 8 wickets good.

katich run out was good though.

[FTE217]

Originally Posted by vztrt

Problem is that pitch is stuffed, so their score isn't that bad.

Yer it sure is, was watching last night and they showed cleaning up the practice wickets using straw brooms ! was a dust bowl and just dead grass.

I was happy having them at 1 -12, and expected our guys get Bell out of the way damn it, agree 8-308 or whatever it is is not bad at all, especially once we are in our top order don't get on with it !! please oh please may we have at least 2 century makers in our first dig.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by prydey

katich run out was good though.

That was a crazy wicket, hopefully he can put a few runs together. Mind you his patience should be good at this ground, and Clarke is a great player of spin.

[Windsor220]

Not looking good for the Aussies so far. 5/108

Actually make that 6.

[xr8-200]

all out for 160.

[FTE217]

un frickn beleive able is all I can say !!

[JC]

They're playing like the Austrian cricket team!

The issue seems to be the pitch; i can't understand in this day and age why pitches aren't prepared to a set standard - I mean crumbling on day 1 is not on, and gives a huge advantage to whoever wins the toos. A game should be decided by skill not the toss of a coin.

Anyway, the game is not quite lost yet; stranger things have happened, but I can't see Australia knocking the Poms over too quickly, so they'll be chasing 300+ with a middle order that is struggling.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by JC

The issue seems to be the pitch;

to a point i agree but england still managed to post 300+ in their 2nd innings. australia missed the boat by not playing a specialist spinner and i feel the fact that the game is a must win for england, they wanted it more. after the way england collapsed at headingly everyone thought the aussies would be keeping the ashes. i think the aussies believed the papers and thought all they had to do was turn up and the old england would just roll over and die.

batting first was obviously advantageous but the pitch wasn't to blame for aust. all out for 160. katich was doing the hard yards and no one wanted to stick around. the pitch seems to have slowed up a lot so even though the ball is misbehaving, the batsmen have a lot of time.

this ashes series could do for mike hussey what 05 did for gillespie.

statistically, the aussies have dominated the series. highest run scorers, highest wicket takers, ave less runs per wicket etc etc. they have just played very poor cricket at critical times. their first innings at lords and the oval and the inability to close the deal in cardiff closed the deal. one commentator on cricinfo reckoned the man of the series should be panesar for having the widest bat at cardiff and holding on for a draw. if the aussies had won that game...

its not over yet but only the biggest optimist could see how this could end in any other way than an english victory.

[JC]

Originally Posted by prydey

to a point i agree but england still managed to post 300+ in their 2nd innings. australia missed the boat by not playing a specialist spinner and i feel the fact that the game is a must win for england, they wanted it more. after the way england collapsed at headingly everyone thought the aussies would be keeping the ashes. i think the aussies believed the papers and thought all they had to do was turn up and the old england would just roll over and die.

batting first was obviously advantageous but the pitch wasn't to blame for aust. all out for 160. katich was doing the hard yards and no one wanted to stick around. the pitch seems to have slowed up a lot so even though the ball is misbehaving, the batsmen have a lot of time.

this ashes series could do for mike hussey what 05 did for gillespie.

statistically, the aussies have dominated the series. highest run scorers, highest wicket takers, ave less runs per wicket etc etc. they have just played very poor cricket at critical times. their first innings at lords and the oval and the inability to close the deal in cardiff closed the deal. one commentator on cricinfo reckoned the man of the series should be panesar for having the widest bat at cardiff and holding on for a draw. if the aussies had won that game...

its not over yet but only the biggest optimist could see how this could end in any other way than an english victory.

Good summary!

[Windsor220]

Well aussies were doing quite good with Ponting and Hussey holding strong then Ponting somehow gets runout and now Clarke runout for a duck. Seems the fairytale comeback not to be :

[Bearman]

God Damn!! What a disappointment. Our batting sucks the big one that's for sure. They, along with the selectors, should have been made to do a lap of the oval wearing netball dresses and handbags!!

What a letdown!! Ashes gone again, we're nothing until we get them back and that won't happen until we rebuild the side. Hussey, why wait until now to make any runs??????

Now for a one day series, couldn't give a toss. Test cricket is all that matters, even if we win the one day series it's a pretty dismal consolation prize at best.

I'm just so PI55ED!! : : :

[DJR-351]

Australia surrenders the Ashes

England has repeated the euphoric scenes of four years ago, reclaiming the Ashes after comprehensively defeating Australia by 197 runs in the fifth and deciding Test at The Oval.

Set a record fourth innings target of 546 for victory, Australia was eventually bowled out for 348 in the final session of the fourth day.

A determined 121 by Michael Hussey was not enough for Australia to salvage the famous urn as England clinched the series 2-1.

The gallant Hussey was the last man to fall, inside-edging Graeme Swann (4 for 120) onto his pad and straight to Alastair Cook at forward short leg.

The loss means Ricky Ponting is stuck with the unwanted record of becoming the first Australian captain in over 100 years to be the skipper of two losing Ashes tours.

The defeat also sees Australia slip to fourth on the ICC Test rankings behind South Africa, Sri Lanka and India. England is fifth.

Ponting was quick to praise England's captain Andrew Strauss and his team for a deserved win.

"England have won some really crucial moments during the series, you look through all the stats and you don't know how it turned out like it has," he said.

"There's been countless opportunities for us throughout to put our stamp on the series and we haven't been good enough and England has seized whatever momentum they could and run with it.

"England won the big moments, they've deserved to win the series and full credit to our boys for fighting it out like they have."

Ponting also said he would not blame the uncharacteristically dry Oval pitch for his side's poor performance in the deciding Test.

"It was a poor wicket I thought but it had no influence on the outcome," he said.

"Both teams had their chance to bat on it twice, and when we had our chance, probably when the pitch was at its best, we came up short."

English paceman Stuart Broad was awarded man-of-the-match for his 5 for 37 which sparked Australia's collapse to 160 in its first innings.

Strauss was named man of the series, finishing as the leading runscorer with 474 at 52.66.

Double run-out

The pivotal moment in the day's play came when two pieces of fielding brilliance by Andrew Flintoff and Strauss ran out Ponting and deputy Michael Clarke in the space of six balls after lunch.

Disaster struck when Ponting (66) sluggishly embarked on a a dicey single to mid-on from the non-striker's end.

Flintoff, as if almost waiting to stamp his authority on the contest, gathered and launched the ball in one fluid motion to uproot the stumps and catch a stunned Ponting well short of his ground.

The dismissal came with the tourists at 2 for 271 and ended a gritty 127-run partnership between Ponting and Hussey as the pair built an audacious bid to guide Australia to the most improbable of triumphs.

The importance of the breakthrough was not lost on the irrepressible Flintoff, who stood in his familiar pose, arms raised as he soaked up the adulation of the fans and his team-mates in his final Test.

Only five balls later, Australia's form batsman in the series, Clarke, was unluckily on his way for a duck.

Clarke flicked the ball off his pads into the foot of short leg with Strauss at leg slip reacting quickest to underarm the ball back at the stumps.

The third umpire ruled Clarke's bat was on the line when the bail was dislodged and duly pressed the red button to set off frenzied celebrations in the stands.

The pain was compounded for Australia when Marcus North (10) missed a sweep shot to Swann and could not get his toe back behind the crease as Matt Prior sharply whipped off the bails.

When Brad Haddin (34) threw his wicket away after adding 91 with Hussey, Australia's tail-end was exposed and its resistance came to a swift end under the setting London sun.

Resuming at 0 for 80, the morning started dreadfully for the tourists, with openers Simon Katich and Shane Watson both trapped lbw inside the first five overs.

Katich padded up to an arm ball from Swann for 43 before Watson fell only three balls later to Broad for 40.

Ponting and Hussey helped the visitors avoid a repeat of its first innings collapse by guiding their side to lunch before a chaotic middle session spelt the end for Australia.

England good enough

Looking purely from a statistical viewpoint, it is difficult to comprehend how Australia was unable to retain the Ashes.

Strauss led the runscoring but the next six spots were taken by Australian batsmen who scored eight centuries to England's two.

Similarly, Australia's pace trio of Ben Hilfenhaus (22), Peter Siddle (20) and Mitchell Johnson (20) occupy the top three wicket-taking positions with Broad next on the list with 18.

"When we were bad we were very bad, and when we were good we managed to be good enough," Strauss said before raising the urn.

"Coming here today you felt it was so close, but the closer it got the harder it was.

"Just amazing relief and elation once we took that final wicket."

[HTCURRY]

this is something I put together with some collegues at work...yes we are cricket/sports freaks.

ok now that the series is done and dusted, some numbers(I love numbers)

Most runs

A Strauss-Eng(474)
M Clarke-Aus(448)
R Ponting-Aus(385)
M North-Aus(367)
S Katich-Aus(341)

so out of top 5 run getters 4 belong to Australia.

Highest Scores

A Strauss-Eng(161)
R Ponting-Aus(150)
M Clarke-Aus(136)
M North-Aus(125*)
S Katich-Aus(122)

Again highest run getters Australia with 4 out of 5.

Most wickets

B Hilfenhaus-Aus(22)
P Siddle-Aus(20)
M Johnson-Aus(20)
S Broad-Eng(18)
G Swann-Eng(14)

Yet again Aus with the top 3 out of 5 in the bowling stakes.

Batting and Bowling overview

Australia

8 centuries and 13 half centuries as a team.

averaged 33.34 with the bat.

81 wickets in 5 matches

averaged 41.8 with the ball in hand.


England

2 centuries and 17 half centuries as a team.

averaged 31 with the bat.

69 wickets in 5 matches.

averaged 52.8 with ball in hand.


So what these stats prove is that numbers dont mean ANYTHING.

Australia was ahead in just about every category that counted, except the one that counted, wins and losses.

MoS - Andrew Strauss

These numbers really do show, how this series despite Australia not being close to its best, was a case of missed opportunities. This English team was not great, and in some cases it was rather poor, but selection errors, temperament and gumption cost us this Ashes series.

Lots of thinking to do....

Edit: oops didnt realise DJR had already included some of these stats in his post just above mine...apologies.

[Robos F6]

That first test really killed us. Was there for the taking but we couldnt get the last wicket.

If you took our huge score of 6-600 or whatever, our averages would have been quite poor. Didnt we score 4 centuries in that innings, enough said really, unfortunately it shows the Aussies who where such a dominant team are now back in the group and are going to struggle against most teams. Watson is not an opener, there is no strike bowler and they don't have a good spinner. Gone are the days of Mcgrath, Warne, Gilchrist