Third Investec Ashes Test, England v Australia, Old Trafford 1-5 Aug 2013

[keaton]

I really don't understand the love for Stokes. His first class average this year is pretty much the same as Bairstow's Ashes average. And his regular first class averagge is only slighter better than Bairstow's test average. He's not done anything this year really, apart from get sent home from a tour

 

[spring hall convert]

Spinner and keeper in this side would get into that side.

Anderson for Hoggard possibly.

Anderson for Hoggard definately
Cook for Strauss
Pietersen is a better player now, as is Bell
Trott is a better no.3 batsman than Vaughan, though Vaughan was obviously worth his weight in gold as captain.

 

[BensGrandad]

Anderson for Hoggard definately
Cook for Strauss
Pietersen is a better player now, as is Bell
Trott is a better no.3 batsman than Vaughan,though Vaughan was obviously worth his weight in gold as captain[/QUOTE
Not so sure about that

 

[spring hall convert]

I'd say its clear that this side isn't as good as the one in 2011 as after we beat India 4-0 we were number one in the world. Now we're 2nd. They might not be much different in terms of personnel but at that time but nearly everyone was in form. This year there hasn't really been a consistent perfomer. Back in 2011 we had our batsmen and bowlers all at their peak.

The 05 team was great and it will always be remembered as the time when we turned the tide against the Aussies, but again it was an example of a team bang in form and at the peak of their abilities. That was exposed a year later.

Don't put too much faith in the rankings. The Indian side we played that summer were a team very much on the wane with a number of greats reaching the end of the road & the guys behind them with not much experience. They also lost their best bowler on the first day of the series. In addition India's record in England is generally appalling. At that time they might have been the number one team in the rankings but they weren't the best team in the world.

Conversely, the South African team that came over here last summer were the best team in the world and had been for some time (since the Aussies eventual decline I would say.) Look at South Africa vs us man for man & they were definately the better team. Add to that the fact that English conditions are far from alien to the South Africans.

In conclusion, despite the change in ranking, I don't think there is really a great deal of difference between the 2011 team and now. We've been consistent for some time. The 2005 team were great for that series and the year preceeding it but broke apart in pretty spectacular fashion. It depends on how you view it as to which were the better team, I don't really think there is a right and wrong answer.

 

[spring hall convert]

Anderson for Hoggard definately
Cook for Strauss
Pietersen is a better player now, as is Bell
Trott is a better no.3 batsman than Vaughan,though Vaughan was obviously worth his weight in gold as captain[/QUOTE
Not so sure about that

Each to their own I guess, perhaps Trott's consistency sees him over the line for me. Undoubtedly, Vaughan was the better player to watch in full flow & I'm not sure Trott has been through a purple patch the same as Vaughan's in Australia 2002/3.

 

[ExmouthExile]

I know it's getting old, but still......

 

[Bold Seagull]

Anderson for Hoggard definately
Cook for Strauss
Pietersen is a better player now, as is Bell
Trott is a better no.3 batsman than Vaughan, though Vaughan was obviously worth his weight in gold as captain.

Not so sure about that

Each to their own I guess, perhaps Trott's consistency sees him over the line for me. Undoubtedly, Vaughan was the better player to watch in full flow & I'm not sure Trott has been through a purple patch the same as Vaughan's in Australia 2002/3.

Vaughan was a superior player to what Trott is at present with an array of shots so pleasing on the eye, to watch him was like watching something so fluid it wouldn't have looked out of place in the Royal Ballet.

Not till I saw him live for the first time at Lords when he got a 100 against the WI's, did I realise how balanced, composed and beautiful batsman he was to watch. In full flow he was a glorious sight on a cricket pitch.

Trott has scored some great knocks, and is a composed run scorer, but for me I'd have Vaughan in at no.3 every day of the week over Trott.

As for captaincy, Vaughan has been the best since Brearley, Cook would do well to sit down either with Vaughan, or study how he captained the side.

 

[spring hall convert]

Vaughan was a superior player to what Trott is at present with an array of shots so pleasing on the eye, to watch him was like watching something so fluid it wouldn't have looked out of place in the Royal Ballet.

Not till I saw him live for the first time at Lords when he got a 100 against the WI's, did I realise how balanced, composed and beautiful batsman he was to watch. In full flow he was a glorious sight on a cricket pitch.

Trott has scored some great knocks, and is a composed run scorer, but for me I'd have Vaughan in at no.3 every day of the week over Trott.
As for captaincy, Vaughan has been the best since Brearley, Cook would do well to sit down either with Vaughan, or study how he captained the side.

I don't think there is much in it, I know I'd rather watch Vaughan's flair versus Trott's grinding accumulation. I suspect Trott will end his career with a significantly better average than Vaughan but nowhere near the number of memorable innings Vaughan had.

Without a doubt, towards the end Vaughan was painful to watch, when his eye & foot movement had deserted him, I just can't really see that happening with Trott.

Your captaincy point is completely on the money. I doubt the English players with their current attitude toward the media would allow it to happen though.

 

[JCL - the new kid in town]

Each to their own I guess, perhaps Trott's consistency sees him over the line for me. Undoubtedly, Vaughan was the better player to watch in full flow & I'm not sure Trott has been through a purple patch the same as Vaughan's in Australia 2002/3.

I felt Vaughans batting certainly declined once he became captain as seems to be often the way which Trott is unlikely to have to hinder him

 

[Bold Seagull]

I don't think there is much in it, I know I'd rather watch Vaughan's flair versus Trott's grinding accumulation. I suspect Trott will end his career with a significantly better average than Vaughan but nowhere near the number of memorable innings Vaughan had.

Without a doubt, towards the end Vaughan was painful to watch, when his eye & foot movement had deserted him, I just can't really see that happening with Trott.

Your captaincy point is completely on the money. I doubt the English players with their current attitude toward the media would allow it to happen though.

Yes, I agree, Trott has the potential to break some records.

As for Vaughan, he made average players believe in themselves to the extent they played well above their ability. This was none more so evident than with players like Giles, Hoggard and Harmison. He placed fields that showed he believed they'd take wickets, he'd invent fielding positions to show he was covering every potential chance for them. And boy did they play for him. It was a cruel irony that in lifting the team to new levels of achievement, his own cricketing form never recovered, one of sports cruel ironies, however the belief he instilled is still there today. His legacy sustained Strauss's captaincy, but Cook is now having to stand on his own 2 feet and the pressure is starting to show.

 

[keaton]

His legacy sustained Strauss's captaincy, but Cook is now having to stand on his own 2 feet and the pressure is starting to show.

You know we're 2-0 right? and his average as captain is just under 50

 

[spring hall convert]

Yes, I agree, Trott has the potential to break some records.

As for Vaughan, he made average players believe in themselves to the extent they played well above their ability. This was none more so evident than with players like Giles, Hoggard and Harmison. He placed fields that showed he believed they'd take wickets, he'd invent fielding positions to show he was covering every potential chance for them. And boy did they play for him. It was a cruel irony that in lifting the team to new levels of achievement, his own cricketing form never recovered, one of sports cruel ironies, however the belief he instilled is still there today. His legacy sustained Strauss's captaincy, but Cook is now having to stand on his own 2 feet and the pressure is starting to show.

Cookie's a great learner though, I trust him to come good. However, he is definately more of a "spreadsheet" captain (someone else on here coined that one the other day, great work!) as was Strauss. One thing that I haven't heard considered - Is it Flower's influence?

 

[Bold Seagull]

You know we're 2-0 right? and his average as captain is just under 50

We're 2-0 and not 2-1 because of the rain. Lets be humble and realistic enough to know we haven't played well to this point, 2-0 flatters us given how poor they were in the first 2 tests.

I'm not going to question Cook's batting, to do so would be ridiculous. I am talking about decisions in the field, what he's asking his bowlers to bowl at, how defensive he can quickly become, and how he just allows periods of play to drift rather than just thinking of some creative things to try. He is not immune from discussing his role in managing England in the field.

Cookie's a great learner though, I trust him to come good. However, he is definately more of a "spreadsheet" captain (someone else on here coined that one the other day, great work!) as was Strauss. One thing that I haven't heard considered - Is it Flower's influence?

'Speadsheet' captain was mine. Thanks! I do have faith that Cook can come good, but right now someone needs to get in his ear. He can develop into a fine captain, and perhaps Flower is having an influence, certainly under his watch Strauss and Cook have both been pretty conservative in how they lead the team.

 

[keaton]

Cookie's a great learner though, I trust him to come good. However, he is definately more of a "spreadsheet" captain (someone else on here coined that one the other day, great work!) as was Strauss. One thing that I haven't heard considered - Is it Flower's influence?

I think they both definetley do things Flower's way. And while it's not perhaps the most exciting way, it does seem to work pretty well

 

[Bold Seagull]

I might seem like I'm being overly critical of this England side, but I tell you where I am with it.

For the first time in my 39 years, I have a national sporting team that could touch greatness. Not just win a series here and then, and be no.1 for a few months, I mean a side that is remembered through the ages like the great West Indian or Australian teams.

It's because I think this group is so good, that we have so much strength in depth, that I am incredibly frustrated we are not firing on all cyclinders on the biggest stage of them all. Perhaps I am expecting too much, but this team is on the verge of being unbeatable - I really believe that.

However, the South Africans, NZ on their patch and Australia here have shown we still show some of those historic frailties, like it's in the team's DNA.

Perhaps it is unreasonable, and not very sporting, but I wanted to smash this Australian team into the ground. I didn't want any excitement, I wanted a procession, a succession of massive victories and seeing a group of green and yellow's depart these shores so humiliated like they've never done since the days their ancestors left with iron round their ankles.

I didn't feel any sense of elation in retaining the Ashes Monday. Clarke out captained our captain, their bowlers out bowled our bowlers, they out thought us in this match. It was a defeat in everything but name to me, hence I've been all over this thread venting my fragile emotions.

I hope we dominate them in the next 2 tests, because perhaps this winter this team does fulfill it's potential and develop a ruthless streak all great teams have. I want them to suffer even just a small dose of the 15 or so years we had to endure.

 

[Gwylan]

I don't think there is much in it, I know I'd rather watch Vaughan's flair versus Trott's grinding accumulation. I suspect Trott will end his career with a significantly better average than Vaughan but nowhere near the number of memorable innings Vaughan had.

I think you have to look at quality of opposition. Vaughan played against McGrath, Warne, Donald, Kumble, Wasim and Waqar. I don't think Trott has had to play against a truly exceptional bowler, with the possible exception of Steyn and Amir.

I
For the first time in my 39 years, I have a national sporting team that could touch greatness. Not just win a series here and then, and be no.1 for a few months, I mean a side that is remembered through the ages like the great West Indian or Australian teams.

You're being optimistic here. Those teams steam-rollered the opposition, streets ahead of anyone else - we're not even the best side in the world

 

[spring hall convert]

I think you have to look at quality of opposition. Vaughan played against McGrath, Warne, Donald, Kumble, Wasim and Waqar. I don't think Trott has had to play against a truly exceptional bowler, with the possible exception of Steyn and Amir.



You're being optimistic here. Those teams steam-rollered the opposition, streets ahead of anyone else - we're not even the best side in the world

Fair point, that is a factor, you need to add Murali to Vaughan's list & Ajmal & Mohammed Asif to Trott's list but on balance Vaughan played better bowlers. In addition, I also think the quality of wickets worldwide has improved slightly.

You're second point is quite correct, South Africa beat us a with a fair bit to spare over here last summer.

 

[knocky1]

Yawn........

 

[Bold Seagull]

You're being optimistic here. Those teams steam-rollered the opposition, streets ahead of anyone else - we're not even the best side in the world

I probably am, but not unreasonably so. On paper the only team that should be able to touch us is South Africa, and they did, although had that been a 5 match test series, I think it would have ended up closer.

I believe on form Cook, Trott, KP, Bell, Prior, Anderson, Broad and Swann would all walk into pretty much every test side in the world at the moment. We shouldn't underestimate how good this team could or should be, even if it does border on optimism.

The future tours programme is ridiculous in itself though in it's inflexibility. Since 2010 SA haven't played a test series longer than 3 tests against anyone. They don't have a 4 test series until we visit in winter 2015/16. I can't believe that arguably the 2 best test sides around have had only a 4 test series in SA in 2009, a 3 test series here in 2012, and we won't play again until winter 2015. Meanwhile, in the same period playing SA in 2009/2010 up to 2015 (7 tests), we will have played Australia in 20 tests, India 13 tests, Pakistan 10 tests, Sri Lanka, New Zealand, West Indies all 7 tests.

From this summer, I can see us winning our next 7 test series straight putting us on a 9 series winning run up to our visit to SA in Dec 2015. A lot can happen in that period, form, retirements, new debutants, but the core of this team can go on that kind of run and should do. Given we'd have played 30 tests to SA's 18 tests in the same period up to our visit, I firmly expect us to be no.1 going over there.

 

[keaton]

I probably am, but not unreasonably so. On paper the only team that should be able to touch us is South Africa, and they did, although had that been a 5 match test series, I think it would have ended up closer.

I believe on form Cook, Trott, KP, Bell, Prior, Anderson, Broad and Swann would all walk into pretty much every test side in the world at the moment. We shouldn't underestimate how good this team could or should be, even if it does border on optimism.

The future tours programme is ridiculous in itself though in it's inflexibility. Since 2010 SA haven't played a test series longer than 3 tests against anyone. They don't have a 4 test series until we visit in winter 2015/16. I can't believe that arguably the 2 best test sides around have had only a 4 test series in SA in 2009, a 3 test series here in 2012, and we won't play again until winter 2015. Meanwhile, in the same period playing SA in 2009/2010 up to 2015 (7 tests), we will have played Australia in 20 tests, India 13 tests, Pakistan 10 tests, Sri Lanka, New Zealand, West Indies all 7 tests.

From this summer, I can see us winning our next 7 test series straight putting us on a 9 series winning run up to our visit to SA in Dec 2015. A lot can happen in that period, form, retirements, new debutants, but the core of this team can go on that kind of run and should do. Given we'd have played 30 tests to SA's 18 tests in the same period up to our visit, I firmly expect us to be no.1 going over there.

Thing is though you could use South Africa's lack of tests generally and lack of long series as evidence that maybe they're not as good as people think. They play less games generally so they have less wear and tear, less time away from home and less matches to get going for. Also in the 4 or 5 match series there's more chance of players being found out and plans being devised for batsmen or bowlers