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

[Lady Whistledown]

Lots of Aussies on Twitter complaining that the rain has cost them the chance to win/stay in the Ashes.

As opposed to their dreadful performances in both previous Test matches.

And they say we're the whingers.

 

[Hillian1]

Can I stop doing this rain dance now, I'm knackered?

 

[Bold Seagull]

Sorry for expressing an opinion - i dont think this is our best team in 25 /30 years. ok?

There is no need to be sensitive if someone questions that opinion - why post otherwise?

On a point of fact, your assertion that typically in many tests Australia only beat us when we threw it away at the last or taking it to the wire, I think this is factually incorrect. We were often well beaten.

You didn't say you thought another team or another era was better, you just said this team is in transition - I don't see how anyone can say that? It just has 2 fresh faces, but the other 9 are experienced battle hardened proven test cricketers - that really isn't a transition, and none of them are currently debutants, and in the wings we have other test proven players in Finn and Tremlett plus Panesar.

If 25 years takes us back to 1988, which teams have been better then?

We can debate the '05 team all day, but the fact is they went to Australia just over a year later and got smashed 5-0 against an already diminishing Australian side. Whatever the reasons, the injury to Vaughan, making Freddie captain, that team effectively had one summer then imploded. Vaughan was never the same, Trecothick suffered his illness, Jones got injured ending his bright career, Harmison could barely keep in on the square let along aim at the stumps and Freddie only briefly rose to those heights he reached as his body gave up.

On it's day in the summer of '05 that side may have beaten this England side, but currently we have a greater depth of talent. Freddie made the difference as he could bat at 6, and we could still play 3 other seamers and a spinner.

 

[Dave the OAP]

Only lost one out of the last 10 tests at home.

So perhaps we are not that bad a team as some on here think

 

[chucky1973]

Can I stop doing this rain dance now, I'm knackered?

please do, I have to walk the dog in the minute

 

[Bold Seagull]

Only lost one out of the last 10 tests at home.

So perhaps we are not that bad a team as some on here think

I've been quite vocal in criticism, but I've also said I think this is our best team since the early/mid '80s.

The frustration is that they are not currently playing to that potential. Cook, Trott, Prior are all out of sorts, our bowling is miss firing. This team should not be in a position to be losing to this Australian side and relying on the rain to earn a draw.

 

[backson]

You'd like to think that now that's out of the way, we might be a bit more aggressive and expressive in the next two tests; we've looked very nervous most of this series so far.

 

[littlehampton seagull]

Rubbish rain

 

[knocky1]

Joys of cricket are the importance of winning the toss, home team producing the wicket (slow tracks this series for Swann) and rain.
As Vaughan said yesterday once we get to the Australian wickets our pace attack will come good again.
Personally I would have rather lost this test than see Cook wastevsommuch time.

 

[Simster]

Lots of Aussies on Twitter complaining that the rain has cost them the chance to win/stay in the Ashes.

As opposed to their dreadful performances in both previous Test matches.

And they say we're the whingers.

That can't be right. Tyrone Biggums told us that Aussies don't care about cricket.

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

There is no need to be sensitive if someone questions that opinion - why post otherwise?

On a point of fact, your assertion that typically in many tests Australia only beat us when we threw it away at the last or taking it to the wire, I think this is factually incorrect. We were often well beaten.

You didn't say you thought another team or another era was better, you just said this team is in transition - I don't see how anyone can say that? It just has 2 fresh faces, but the other 9 are experienced battle hardened proven test cricketers - that really isn't a transition, and none of them are currently debutants, and in the wings we have other test proven players in Finn and Tremlett plus Panesar.

If 25 years takes us back to 1988, which teams have been better then?

We can debate the '05 team all day, but the fact is they went to Australia just over a year later and got smashed 5-0 against an already diminishing Australian side. Whatever the reasons, the injury to Vaughan, making Freddie captain, that team effectively had one summer then imploded. Vaughan was never the same, Trecothick suffered his illness, Jones got injured ending his bright career, Harmison could barely keep in on the square let along aim at the stumps and Freddie only briefly rose to those heights he reached as his body gave up.

On it's day in the summer of '05 that side may have beaten this England side, but currently we have a greater depth of talent. Freddie made the difference as he could bat at 6, and we could still play 3 other seamers and a spinner.

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.

 

[Hillian1]

That can't be right. Tyrone Biggums told us that Aussies don't care about cricket.

 

[KZNSeagull]

This England side does not have the weak links that it had previously. How often does at least 1 of our top 6 score heavily? Much more often that it used to 10 years ago that's for sure. We have 2 of the best bowlers in the world in Anderson and Swann and Broad is not too shabby. Prior is an excellent wicket keeper/batsman, only challenged by AB de V.

We are beating the Aussies without playing anything like as well as we can. No, we should not be relying on the rain, but it was about time Oz actually scored some runs and their bowling attack is not as weak as some people like to make out. It was a good toss to win for them and I have no doubt that if we had won the toss, we also would have had a large first innings score.

English cricket is rosy and has been for a while. Celebrate that and especially that we are way better than Australia for the first time for a long time. Form is temporary, class is permanent and this is the classiest English side for yonks.

 

[Bold Seagull]

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.

It's the same side though basically, you've got Root in for Strauss who was only averaging 30 odd in that series, and Bairstow in for Morgan, whose technique was again exposed at test level. We went to no.1 because basically SA weren't playing many test matches at that time. Once they got some series underway, then came over and beat us in that ridiculously short series last summer, they rightfully went back to no.1. The biggest performance was going away to India and winning for Cook's first series as captain last Autumn, that was arguably more impressive than the 4-0 at home.

 

[Bold Seagull]

This England side does not have the weak links that it had previously. How often does at least 1 of our top 6 score heavily? Much more often that it used to 10 years ago that's for sure. We have 2 of the best bowlers in the world in Anderson and Swann and Broad is not too shabby. Prior is an excellent wicket keeper/batsman, only challenged by AB de V.

We are beating the Aussies without playing anything like as well as we can. No, we should not be relying on the rain, but it was about time Oz actually scored some runs and their bowling attack is not as weak as some people like to make out. It was a good toss to win for them and I have no doubt that if we had won the toss, we also would have had a large first innings score.

English cricket is rosy and has been for a while. Celebrate that and especially that we are way better than Australia for the first time for a long time. Form is temporary, class is permanent and this is the classiest English side for yonks.

Completely agree.

Okay, Cook, Trott, Bairstow and Prior are struggling with the bat, but then Bell, Root, KP and Broad seem to all be chipping in. If we can get 2 or 3 of those out of form back into form, it's a formidable side.

Who else thinks Onions should come in for Bairstow next test? I'd like to see us take a positive approach on the Chester-le-Street which suits the quicks. It's a risk to the batting, but worth taking I think. Especially if you keep Bresnan in who can bat, along with Broad. Still think we have enough there to get the necessary runs, but the extra seamer could be the match winner.

 

[Basil Fawlty]

This England side does not have the weak links that it had previously. How often does at least 1 of our top 6 score heavily? Much more often that it used to 10 years ago that's for sure. We have 2 of the best bowlers in the world in Anderson and Swann and Broad is not too shabby. Prior is an excellent wicket keeper/batsman, only challenged by AB de V.

We are beating the Aussies without playing anything like as well as we can. No, we should not be relying on the rain, but it was about time Oz actually scored some runs and their bowling attack is not as weak as some people like to make out. It was a good toss to win for them and I have no doubt that if we had won the toss, we also would have had a large first innings score.

English cricket is rosy and has been for a while. Celebrate that and especially that we are way better than Australia for the first time for a long time. Form is temporary, class is permanent and this is the classiest English side for yonks.

110% fully agree with this. I'm confident our top order Batsman will come good in the next two Tests. I think now we've retained it, we can rest the likes of Anderson, Broad and Bresnan so they don't get burn out, before our tour down under. That's why it was a very good move by Flower yesterday, announcing that Onions and Tremlett are in the squad for Friday, I expect Onions will replace Bresnan who deserves a rest.

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

It's the same side though basically, you've got Root in for Strauss who was only averaging 30 odd in that series, and Bairstow in for Morgan, whose technique was again exposed at test level. We went to no.1 because basically SA weren't playing many test matches at that time. Once they got some series underway, then came over and beat us in that ridiculously short series last summer, they rightfully went back to no.1. The biggest performance was going away to India and winning for Cook's first series as captain last Autumn, that was arguably more impressive than the 4-0 at home.

Err not really. We unseated India from the no.1 spot who had held it for nearly two years and we had to beat them 4-0 to do it.

Also you miss my point about the current side. It may be nearly the same personell but the form they are in is completely different. The side today is not a team at the peak of its abilities.

 

[Uncle Buck]

Completely agree.

Okay, Cook, Trott, Bairstow and Prior are struggling with the bat, but then Bell, Root, KP and Broad seem to all be chipping in. If we can get 2 or 3 of those out of form back into form, it's a formidable side.

Who else thinks Onions should come in for Bairstow next test? I'd like to see us take a positive approach on the Chester-le-Street which suits the quicks. It's a risk to the batting, but worth taking I think. Especially if you keep Bresnan in who can bat, along with Broad. Still think we have enough there to get the necessary runs, but the extra seamer could be the match winner.

Whilst I have no issue with Prior at 6, then Bresnan, Broad and Swann at 7, 8 and 9, on the basis those 3 are all number 8's, Flower will not deviate from his 6 and 4 policy.

Bairstow has technical flaws and back to back Ashes series are not the place to sort these. Taylor should come in, although I would be interested to see Stokes play a couple of games as he could do the all rounder role.

 

[Uncle Buck]

Err not really. We unseated India from the no.1 spot who had held it for nearly two years and we had to beat them 4-0 to do it.

Also you miss my point about the current side. It may be nearly the same personell but the form they are in is completely different. The side today is not a team at the peak of its abilities.

The team is not firing. I do not know why Root did not play as an opener in India and New Zealand, would have given him the preparation for this series. Instead the selectors returned to the 90's policy for a brief moment with Compton. Yes he had a good county season, but was not a long term pick.

Bowler wise England potentially have some options coming through, Overton and Kerrigan are 2 that spring to mind. Hopefully Stokes can stay fit and get a chance, ideally at number 7.

Rashid has had a good season with the bat, if his bowling can get somewhere, certainly for sub continent tours he could become an option. The annoying one is Shazad, he looks to have the ability, but also the self destruct.

Batsmen wise, I do struggle to identify too many. It seems that Taylor is next in line, then probably Balance. Jos Butler needs to get away from Somerset as he will not get picked as a batter, but potentially he could be a wicket keeper batsman, but he is not keeping at present.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Err not really. We unseated India from the no.1 spot who had held it for nearly two years and we had to beat them 4-0 to do it.

Also you miss my point about the current side. It may be nearly the same personell but the form they are in is completely different. The side today is not a team at the peak of its abilities.

But in reality South Africa were rightly regarded as the best test side at that time, and quickly ascended to that position - that was my point. It was only a lack of tests that prevented them from doing it sooner. That doesn't take anything away from the 4-0 victory mind, I just don't really see that as a different side to this one, you're only distinguishing the 2 on form.

Form is a very temporary thing, it could return for the next 2 matches and this side would go into the winter at the peak of its powers. Who would have thought the same England side would win in India then scrape a draw in NZ?