The Ashes,your reflections.

[Leekbrookgull]

To close matched sides,Flintoff aura,Swann gave us an option,middle order still has to answer. I take the win,however with the Aussies watching from the balconey. I live in fear,they will re-group and under Ponting (i don't think that they will dump him) WILL BE WAITING FOR US IN AUSTRAILIA !!

 

[Taybha]

Panesar and Anderson batting for a draw in the 1st test ,unlikely but they managed it and knocked the stuffing out of the aussies

 

[gullshark]

that along with the demolition of the aussie batting lineup on the 2nd day of the last test.

 

[Uncle C]

Who won?

 

[jordanseagull]

Thinking 'oh shit' they could do this here - when they just needed 220 odd and were 5 down. Then a bundle of wickets coming, and waiting for the final wicket to be taken.

Freddy was picked ONLY because it was his last, and that run out must have been so very sweet indeed.

 

[South Yarra Seagull]

How quiet it is in the office here in Melbourne this morning...!!!

Although the Aussies are already talking up their chances in 18 months time...

 

[Stumpy Tim]

All this Flintoff nonsense is annoying. He had a poor series apart from one good bowling performance. Strauss is the true hero of this team... the only player who performed consistently throughout the series.

 

[manilaseagull]

The office convict is very quiet here today, after a chat about Cricket he returns with how did Brighton do?

So I shut up.....

 

[Vankleek Hill Seagull]

The office convict is very quiet here today, after a chat about Cricket he returns with how did Brighton do?

So I shut up.....

 

[Jesus Gul]

great to see Mushy in the middle of the changing room celebrations

 

[Touristic_denizen]

The office convict is very quiet here today, after a chat about Cricket he returns with how did Brighton do?

So I shut up.....

:yahoo:

 

[Gwylan]

It wasn't quite as gripping as last time. I think that it was partly down to the quality of the cricket, partly down to the fact that it was second-time around and partly due to the fact that most of us couldn't watch it on TV. But it was still a pretty good series, won by England because they pulled the stops out when it mattered.

The best batsmen and the best bowlers in the series were all Australian but I think Ponting was right: when Australia did badly in a session, they did really badly. They lost two tests because of a single bad session in each of them - but they were really bad sessions. Australia were also unlucky with the weather, without rain interruptions, they'd have won the first test for sure and would probably have won the third - although that was a closer call.

England however lost their best batsman for most of the series and their iconic all-rounder for one game and regrouped well. The selectors did well too; resisting pressure to drop Broad, bringing back Bell - who delivered two 50s - and, most of all, picking Trott. Contrast that with the Aussie selectors who didn't pick a spinner for a wicket where the ball was turning on the first afternoon and who came to England with a newbie opening batsman and no replacement.

I think we'll lose the Ashes again in 18 months time - but not 5-0 this time - but I'll savour the moment for now.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

It wasn't quite as gripping as last time. I think that it was partly down to the quality of the cricket, partly down to the fact that it was second-time around and partly due to the fact that most of us couldn't watch it on TV..

I agree.


The ashes should be one of the "crown jewels" oF sports and should always be on free to view tv.

I get the feeling people are not as bothered this time as they couldnt watch it

 

[Normal Rob]

A travesty that it's not on terrestial television for the masses to see. Relatively speaking not many people really knew or cared.

 

[Monsieur Le Plonk]

.

The best batsmen and the best bowlers in the series were all Australian .

Agree entirely with the Aussies having the best batsmen but over the series I think their bowlers were very poor. Our bowlers weren't much better but they WERE better.

 

[Gwylan]

Agree entirely with the Aussies having the best batsmen but over the series I think their bowlers were very poor. Our bowlers weren't much better but they WERE better.

Top three wicket takers in the series : Ben Hilfenhaus has finished as the leading wicket-taker in the series - 22 at an average of 27.45. The only two other bowlers to have claimed 20 wickets in the series are: Peter Siddle (20 at 30.80) and Mitchell Johnson (20 at 32.55).

They all look suspiciously like Aussies to me.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Top three wicket takers in the series : Ben Hilfenhaus has finished as the leading wicket-taker in the series - 22 at an average of 27.45. The only two other bowlers to have claimed 20 wickets in the series are: Peter Siddle (20 at 30.80) and Mitchell Johnson (20 at 32.55).

They all look suspiciously like Aussies to me.

That doesn't mean those three bowled especially well, so much that they had very little competition amongst their team-mates for those wickets. Conversly, Flintoff, Broad, Anderson, Swann, Harmison and Onions ALL took 4 or more wickets in an innings...

 

[Gwylan]

That doesn't mean those three bowled especially well, so much that they had very little competition amongst their team-mates for those wickets. Conversly, Flintoff, Broad, Anderson, Swann, Harmison and Onions ALL took 4 or more wickets in an innings...

Which is partly the point. Hilfenhaus and Siddle bowled well throughout the series (Johnson less so) while the England bowlers had one or two good innings and failed to keep it up. Broad, Anderson, Swann played in all the games, Flintoff and Onions played in four of them - all of them took at least four wickets in an innings once (or more) and still none of them could take 20 in the series.

 

[Gwylan]

Going forward, Ravi needs to be made clear that he'll never be welcome in an England shirt again..

He'll be back playing for England by this time next year - possibly even this winter. He's got too much talent to be discarded.