Ashes outcome 2023?

[westg]

Oh and for the record and I have never really liked him . David Warner knocking the shine of the ball in first innings was priceless. He set us up for a solid total. 

[Bill Hayes]

One of Australia's popular lawnmower beers - Victoria Bitter, re-labelled a slab of bottles as England Bitter and sent it to the English Cricket Team. Loved it. As for the drama, it seems clear that the mission for England is to bring people back to test cricket. Got to give them credit, it seems to have worked. The Indian IPL 20 20 cricket is very popular, so best get more eyeballs on test cricket TV coverage over 5 days means more money in advertising revenue. As for the cricket itself, I've quite enjoyed it. And Broad is obviously taking up the mantle as agitator to get the crowd up and chanting. I'm also very impressed with Cummins media acumen. He has handled it as good as any, with grace and a smile but hasn't backed down IMHO. I'll be flicking back and forth between the AFL and cricket tonight. Hmmmm.... may require a stout or two. It is winter here. Cheers

[JohnS]

I think Kevin Pietersen made a good call in stating that England should have brought in Ben Foakes for the third test. I can see where England are going with their selections in this game. By bringing in more bowling options they're actually hoping to stay in the contest by conserving Broad and Robinson for the remainder of the series. They say they are confident of winning the next three matches but the reality is that this Australian team has only lost three tests in the last two-and-a-half years.

As for me, I can't fathom why they would bring in both Mark Wood and Chris Woakes and drop Josh Tongue after the Lords test. After all, Tongue picked up Smith and Warner in both innings and looked their most threatening bowler. Now both Wood and Woakes are supposed to come into the team and produce miracles after now bowling in a first-class match since April/May? Really?

I'd be happy if England commit less errors and concede less extras...in other words, focus and concentrate longer in these contests. That's what has let them down. With Broad and Robinson playing their third test in a short time, and now Wood, Woakes and Ali providing bowling support, I would 100% guarantee that the Australian team would be putting their hand up amongst the batters for one of them at least to grind out a big, big hundred if the wicket is flat and the conditions suit.

[Ken Gargett]

2 hours ago, JohnS said:

I think Kevin Pietersen made a good call in stating that England should have brought in Ben Foakes for the third test. I can see where England are going with their selections in this game. By bringing in more bowling options they're actually hoping to stay in the contest by conserving Broad and Robinson for the remainder of the series. They say they are confident of winning the next three matches but the reality is that this Australian team has only lost three tests in the last two-and-a-half years.

As for me, I can't fathom why they would bring in both Mark Wood and Chris Woakes and drop Josh Tongue after the Lords test. After all, Tongue picked up Smith and Warner in both innings and looked their most threatening bowler. Now both Wood and Woakes are supposed to come into the team and produce miracles after now bowling in a first-class match since April/May? Really?

I'd be happy if England commit less errors and concede less extras...in other words, focus and concentrate longer in these contests. That's what has let them down. With Broad and Robinson playing their third test in a short time, and now Wood, Woakes and Ali providing bowling support, I would 100% guarantee that the Australian team would be putting their hand up amongst the batters for one of them at least to grind out a big, big hundred if the wicket is flat and the conditions suit.

john, again, a lot may depend on the toss and conditions but losing both tosses and having the worst of the conditions so far has not stopped the Aussies. insane, to me, that foakes has not been there from day one. that alone might have cost England the Ashes. no sympathy - their decision. 

they were confident of winning the first test (actually, told us they did). they were very confident of winning the second. now confident of winning the third - well, law of averages says that they will get it right eventually. can they win three straight? hard to see, 

yes, agree completely. tongue was by far their best. has bowled in one test only. and has to be rested? imagine telling dennis Lillee that after five tests? or bothan or trueman or warne or pretty much anyone who has ever played for Australia. insane. 

john, they can keep making the errors and conceding extras. not our job to worry about morons. i'm worried that we don't do it. all the fuss about robinson leading the averages so has to stay. well, i think he has three? wickets from the top five (including Khawaja after batting for four sessions and going the slog). the rest? down the tail. big whoop. keep him. he rarely troubles our bats. 

tonight might almost put us over the line to win the series. if only....   then i could finally get some sleep. 

[99call]

On 7/6/2023 at 6:16 AM, JohnS said:

As for me, I can't fathom why they would bring in Mark Wood

Come on JC.....you're slippin!

[JohnS]

5 minutes ago, 99call said:

Come on JC.....you're slippin!

Indeed I am. Furthermore, if you would have asked Ken or myself about the Mitchell Marsh selection, prior to the game, we would have 'recoiled in horror' at the thought of another recall to the Australian test team. Yet look at what happened on day 1 of the 3rd test.

Do we think Jimmy Anderson would have been begging to bowl on that Headingley pitch yesterday?

[99call]

1 minute ago, JohnS said:

Do we think Jimmy Anderson would have been begging to bowl on that Headingley pitch yesterday?

Most definitely. I'm not a fan a geriatric sportsmen, as heartless as it can be,  I'm often in agreement with brutal people like Warren Gatland, 99 caps or not, it someone is on the downward journey of their powers, he just kicks them to the curb.    I think the extra pace of Wood made the difference.  It would have been interesting to see if Jimmy's mastery of swing would have been enough on it's own.

 

[Ken Gargett]

yes, the idea of mitch marsh... nightmares have been built on less. but good on him. 

some really stupid batting by the aussies. if we do not get a big, very big partnership from the current pair, i suspect it is 2-1. 

mind you, what sort of utter pillock is jonny Bairstow. after all the monumental stupidity from him, where he very likely cost England the second test with his brainless actions, and the fact that the club of aussie batsmen who have not been dropped by Bairstow in this series alone is a very small and ever-shrinking one, where does he get the temerity to give smith a gobful? perhaps that was his version of spirit of cricket? had England had a competent keeper, they would be very close to wrapping up the series by now. perhaps shutting your mouth and doing better might be an idea. 

[99call]

7 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

where does he get the temerity to give smith a gobful?

Come on Ken A, this pantomime of bad blood just makes the whole Ashes spectacle that much more enjoyable...and you know it.  and B, by your own rational of 'within the rules, is within the game'.   Saying "Cheer's Smudge". to one of the worlds leading batsmen when his last few innings have been well short of where he liked them to be...... Jesus!!! if you're not going to give them a little sledge then...then when are you?.  Steve Smith is not the Dalai Lama ...Ken!  it's ok to yank his chain when he f's up.     Also the notion that you can only give someone sledge when your own game is in fine fettle, is a a rather large red herring, if anything it would have just pissed Smith off even more...i.e. perfect. 

PS why do you hate Broad so much?  I'm not questioning that you should or shouldn't, i'm just intrigued.  I don't know cricket enough to know what ill's he may have gotten up to.  Is it that he's just a bit foppish and often has slightly cringe celebrations? i.e. the public school boy guffawing,  thumbs up nonsense?. 

 

[JohnS]

I haven't been able to catch the play, but going by the highlights and articles of the first two days play in Leeds it seems that hitting an innings over 50 is quite a challenge.

For me, this is anyone's game. The weather forecast is not great for the next three days but let's see if we even need much of the fourth day.

 

[99call]

7 hours ago, JohnS said:

For me, this is anyone's game. The weather forecast is not great

Currently England have been hugely fortunate with the weather in all three tests.....all largely squandered. 

[Ken Gargett]

On 7/8/2023 at 7:10 PM, JohnS said:

I haven't been able to catch the play, but going by the highlights and articles of the first two days play in Leeds it seems that hitting an innings over 50 is quite a challenge.

For me, this is anyone's game. The weather forecast is not great for the next three days but let's see if we even need much of the fourth day.

 

john, i thought we lost it went we dropped stokes twice in two balls the other day. cost us about 70 runs but more importantly, i thought it gave England belief and momentum and we never got them back. thought we had a small chance when we got jonny last night but we needed to follow it up with another wicket which we could not. 

England undoubtedly had the better of conditions and all three tosses but not much one can do about that and over the years it evens out. in any event, not sure we'd have done it differently if we won the toss. very interested to see the two teams if all fit. who knows what bowlers England will use - they do chop and change and don't always seem to use their best. the one change no aussie wants to see is bairstow dropped.

for us, hazlewood for boland for sure. but do we keep marsh and if so do they leave green out or do we play both (unlikely). the only bat to go would be warner. head or Marnus to open? 

[Ken Gargett]

On 7/8/2023 at 5:57 PM, 99call said:

Come on Ken A, this pantomime of bad blood just makes the whole Ashes spectacle that much more enjoyable...and you know it.  and B, by your own rational of 'within the rules, is within the game'.   Saying "Cheer's Smudge". to one of the worlds leading batsmen when his last few innings have been well short of where he liked them to be...... Jesus!!! if you're not going to give them a little sledge then...then when are you?.  Steve Smith is not the Dalai Lama ...Ken!  it's ok to yank his chain when he f's up.     Also the notion that you can only give someone sledge when your own game is in fine fettle, is a a rather large red herring, if anything it would have just pissed Smith off even more...i.e. perfect. 

PS why do you hate Broad so much?  I'm not questioning that you should or shouldn't, i'm just intrigued.  I don't know cricket enough to know what ill's he may have gotten up to.  Is it that he's just a bit foppish and often has slightly cringe celebrations? i.e. the public school boy guffawing,  thumbs up nonsense?. 

 

interesting with what you suggest was said to smith. i think that might be a polite English version. but now we are back to rules of the game? england and their fans seem to think it all fine to be all about the rules when it suits them and then it is all about the spirit of cricket if the rules don't work for them. i'm afraid that i would have had no issue if one of englnd's competent players had sledged smith but when it is the bloke who has done more than anyone to lose the series for england, it just makes him even more of a tosser. 

i am not the least interested in pantomime and nor do i believe any serious fan is - if that is your thing, forget tests and go and watch one day and t20 cricket. 

as for broad, hate is way too strong. i did name a much loved pet after him. that hardly suggests hate. but i am way behind too many deadlines to get into stuart broad here. 

[JohnS]

Well, it's great to have a tight contest and the series alive. I agree Ken, both sides had their chances and kudos to Brook and Woakes at the end to close this 3rd test out, like Cummins and Lyon did in the 1st test.

Onwards to Old Trafford, Manchester in a few weeks...

[99call]

6 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

interesting with what you suggest was said to smith. i think that might be a polite English version. but now we are back to rules of the game? england and their fans seem to think it all fine to be all about the rules when it suits them and then it is all about the spirit of cricket if the rules don't work for them

Firstly i'm not an England fan, but rather just enjoy the Ashes.    "Cheers Smudge" is all I heard on the stump mic, but thats all the BBC played so I will never know, maybe Sky had difference coverage?   For the record I don't really enjoy sledging, to my mind the only joy it's brought to the world is far more centred in the responses, than those initiating.   The way that BBC introduced the notion of sledging when I was a kid, was very much like it was an Australian import, like it was something England would have to steel themselves against, I don't know the history of if or who the main protagonists/originators were?.  Personally I much prefer a Curtly Ambrose style of quite menace

Much like the stumping I would categorise sledging as being a desperate part of the game.  If players are desperate to win, there is obviously nothing wrong with that, but every game has parts of the rule book, that in an ideal world you wouldn't want to resort to.    A few 6nations ago, Wales had the French pack on toast, 5m out from their try line in the 75 minute, a penalty try is immanent, the French loose head fanes injury, and the bring there 1st choice loose head back on from the bench,  shore up the scrum....France hold on and win the match.      At the time I was absolutely disgusted, winning by having to resort to some pre arranged 'code red' plan, felt like an incredibly grubby act to me.     Anyway about 5yrs later, Wales are on their own 5m line defending the same situation from Georgia!!!, and do exactly the same thing.   I can honestly say, (hand on heart) I would have rather Wales had lost, than have to resort to that. It was toe curlingly embarrassing. 

Now I don't think the stumping was as bad as that, not by a long stretch, , but it was still pretty grim (especially as it seems it was pre-arranged) .  I'll go back to my original point though, I think that Aussie teams of old wouldn't of had to resort to such actions, they would have had him bowled within his 1st 20 deliveries.  If he'd of got 60+ could I see Healy or Gilchrist, going "right plan A, B, C, and D have failed,  now it's any means necessary" ?? ....yes, of course I could.   Personally in sport I want to see the best bowling go up against the best batting, view areas of the game that demonstrate the finest skill, and the finest margins,  not watch page 405 of technical dismissals.   Yes its a part of the game, but its the part you least want to see/sully yourself with. 

Great to see that the Ashes is still alive, even if it has to have a negative impact on your sleep Ken!.   So good to see edge of your seat sport again, the memories of Covid and stuff like the Lions tours being played in empty stadiums, whoever wins the Ashes, It's great to have box office sport back on the screens. 

 

[JohnS]

I think playing Wood and Woakes was a big risk (due to lack of first-class cricket) and kudos to England that it paid off for this test. The same could be said for Mitchell Marsh and he had a great game too.

In the end, Australia lost this match because they were one bowler short in potency, whereas England had three. By that I mean, Broad, Wood and Woakes took wickets whereas only Cummins and Starc took mutiple wickets in this match.

For the 4th test, although I very much like Scott Boland, he didn't take any wickets in the third test and Josh Hazlewood will present a better bowler option. David Warner can no longer play for Australia, the Leeds test needs to be his last game. Similarly, Jonny Bairstow can't justify his selection any longer either.

[Ken Gargett]

On 7/9/2023 at 3:03 AM, 99call said:

Currently England have been hugely fortunate with the weather in all three tests.....all largely squandered. 

using the power of hindsight, that rather went badly! perhaps it is simply things evening out. (i'd add in other advantages like winning every toss). 

mind you, it has not stopped the most monumental outpouring of whinging and hypocrisy since, well, the last time England lost something.

that said, we were certainly fortunate to get out of this latest test with the draw.

so, the ills of the world have been rectified, the globe back on its axis, all is well and the ashes retained. but england has certainly made it much tougher than i think any aussie anticipated. one will be able to sleep easily again. 

i said to one of my pommy mates that i thought the teams got on well off the field. not so certain that is the case now. when stokes was interviewed post game (not seen the official press conferences so things might have been rectified), not a word of congrats to the aussies for retaining the ashes. i thought that terribly poor form. then cummins was interviewed and not a word about the good showing by the poms. so both as bad as each other. 

love all the outrage from over in mud island. piers morgan - greatest travesty in ashes history or some such rubbish, because it rained (in england - shocker). and yet he, broad and Collingwood all revelled in the fact that the poms retained the ashes a decade earlier (all happily put it out on twitter etc, where it sat just waiting for them to take a slightly different position when they are the victim), when rain stopped Australia's march to victory on the last day. do English dictionaries simply not include the word 'hypocrisy'? 

surely best of all is that moron who really is dumber than tree bark, jonny Bairstow. his keeping largely cost England the first two tests. then he wanders down the pitch and gets stumped and carries on like it is the holocaust revisited. now comes out in a press conference and says that carey's (perfectly legal and legit) actions were not those of a role model and not a good influence on kids. has he really forgotten that he tried to do the same thing two days earlier? or does that not count because he missed it? 

anyway, looking forward to the last test. very hard to see the aussies getting up with all the momentum with the poms. bit like winning that third state of origin for the whitewash. but who knows? we might even win a toss. and we can't play any worse. 

 

[99call]

Now then @Ken Gargett, what do we make of "The Scorpion's" inspection of the Labuschagne bales in between deliveries?.   I think some batsman wear OCD as a batch of honour, i.e. they have their superstitions, and pre-delivery set ups.    Broad casually walking up, and messing with Labuschagnes chi,  I thought was both hilarious and a stroke of genius. 

Now this is all on the basis that it lives up to your "if it's in the rules, then it's A-ok".   I'm not trying to wind you up Ken unnecessarily , but I do think this particular bit of mind games from Broad is an interesting test of the position you had taken over the Bairstow stumping.   Did you enjoy it as good cricket?   did you think it awful? did you see it as being within the rules? did Labuschagne have any right to feel aggrieved? 

Be interested to hear your thoughts

[Ken Gargett]

11 hours ago, 99call said:

Now then @Ken Gargett, what do we make of "The Scorpion's" inspection of the Labuschagne bales in between deliveries?.   I think some batsman wear OCD as a batch of honour, i.e. they have their superstitions, and pre-delivery set ups.    Broad casually walking up, and messing with Labuschagnes chi,  I thought was both hilarious and a stroke of genius. 

Now this is all on the basis that it lives up to your "if it's in the rules, then it's A-ok".   I'm not trying to wind you up Ken unnecessarily , but I do think this particular bit of mind games from Broad is an interesting test of the position you had taken over the Bairstow stumping.   Did you enjoy it as good cricket?   did you think it awful? did you see it as being within the rules? did Labuschagne have any right to feel aggrieved? 

Be interested to hear your thoughts

i actually thought it exactly the same as starc pissing about with the crowd appeal against Bairstow the ball before he got him out. if that stuff on either side is enough to get test players out, we'd see a hell of a lot more of it. i simply don't think it is relevant to either. 

also, if it really did make an impact, why on earth was England not clever enough to do it when they had a chance to win the ashes? 

in the end, assuming no last innings miracle (and i think we can take that for granted - the aussies look exhausted and i doubt mentally up for it), the team will be disappointed that they didn't win the series but they retained the ashes and that was the main aim. retaining the ashes in England (or England doing so out here) is a huge achievement and in time, the disappointment will wear off and the team should be celebrated for what they have done and how they have done it. 

both sides will look very different when England come out here in 2 1/2 years. 

[99call]

9 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

i actually thought it exactly the same as starc pissing about with the crowd appeal against Bairstow the ball before he got him out. if that stuff on either side is enough to get test players out, we'd see a hell of a lot more of it. i simply don't think it is relevant to either. 

also, if it really did make an impact, why on earth was England not clever enough to do it when they had a chance to win the ashes? 

in the end, assuming no last innings miracle (and i think we can take that for granted - the aussies look exhausted and i doubt mentally up for it), the team will be disappointed that they didn't win the series but they retained the ashes and that was the main aim. retaining the ashes in England (or England doing so out here) is a huge achievement and in time, the disappointment will wear off and the team should be celebrated for what they have done and how they have done it. 

both sides will look very different when England come out here in 2 1/2 years. 

I would agree that players at test level should be immune to letting such high jinks effect their game.  That said Labuschagne definitely did seem pissed off about it and seem to reference it to the umpire, after he nicked off to the slips. 

"England not being clever enough early enough" etc.   was sort of my point,  that post the stumping, it sort of opened to sluice gate for all sorts of play being fair game.   I think part of Broad doing it, was him saying, "well if you want to play like that, then you have opened the pandoras box to stuff like this"

It's been a hugely enjoyable Ashes, sad that Old Trafford being rained off, robbing all fans of the highest drama, but mother nature is an intrinsic part of the game. 

England definitely seem on their uppers, and have alloyed some actual brain cells behind out and out Bazball.  It looks like if you were to take it to 7 tests,  currently England would win it, but thats sort of the point isn't it.    England seemed to come into the first test with preconceived ideas of what was going to happen, whereas Australia actually played the events as they unfolded.  

Congratulations to Australia, by hook or by crook drawing blood in a two test lead, was a killer blow.  Strangely,  although massively entertaining, I think there was actually pretty poor cricket from both sides.  It was like watching a 64-72 rugby match where by a novice fan would assume it's been a fabulous match, but the reality is that watching two teams that can score lots of tries but cant tackle for toffee, is not top class sport.       I think Khawaja and Wood were the only cricketers whereby you could argue had top class performances. 

Anyway congrats again, and yes, it will be very interesting to see what both teams are in Australia

 

[JohnS]

Who would have expected an outcome like the one we have for the last day's play at the Oval? With Australia at 0/135 and needing another 249 to win I still think it's a challenge that's likely too far. Yet, the rain and the keeping of wickets intact has opened up the game in terms of possible scenarios. And what if it rains a little more on Day 5? Will Australia still go for it? Will they try to draw if they lose wickets? Will England take all ten to draw the series?

No matter what happens, I have appreciated the England fightback from 2-0 down. It would have been easy to succumb to the pressure of the scoreline and drop off in intensity but credit to England they didn't.

[Webbo]

On 6/19/2023 at 2:28 PM, Webbo said:

Going to be interesting clash of styles and a tight series. I'm going 3-2 England, no draws.

Well I nearly got it right, bloody Manchester weather.😡

[Webbo]

5 hours ago, Webbo said:

Well I nearly got it right, bloody Manchester weather.😡

The irony is of the 5 tests 4 were close games that could have gone either way. The one that was not close ended as a draw. 

[MoeFOH]

Congrats to England on the 5th test win. Deserved after the 4th test dominance. 

To us Aussies, congrats on retaining the Ashes. Side note for the future: catches win matches. And so does avoiding prolonged moronic periods of bowling. 

A strange series overall. On balance, a drawn series is probably the fairest result. I'm sure either side wouldn't claim they played dominant cricket for a majority share of the series or didn't ride their luck for significant portions of play. To be honest, from memory, I can't really recall Ashes sides that played as poorly as this at times. It's one thing if you run into an opponent stacked with champions, in a golden era, and they dominate you... but these are two teams far from that. And it showed. 

I guess it made for interesting cricket, but the overall standard was pretty low, in my layman's opinion. Wildly inconsistent, at best. 

Brook and Wood standouts for England, for mine. The former really looks the goods. Crawley would be in there, too, if he wasn't the beneficiary of an aimless bowling attack way too often. And he played with more than a decent amount of luck at times. 

For us, I really couldn't name a standout. The loss of Nathan Lyon can't be understated... Let's go with that. 

 

[99call]

21 hours ago, MoeFOH said:

For us, I really couldn't name a standout. The loss of Nathan Lyon can't be understated... Let's go with that. 

I'd say thats pretty harsh on Usman Khawaja, he should be incredibly pissed off not to be on a team that would win 5-0.    His batting average was 49.60 over 10 innings, and the disciplined manner in the way he went about getting them too. I think he was man of the series, but in a very quiet unassuming way. He was everything, everyone else wasn't, assured, steady, gritty. composed. 

Would agree with your wider assessment though, it was enthralling not for the quality, rather more the drama created by a category of errors.