Ashes 2015: Australia v England

[Peters]

I'm not wrong, it was widely known how much bouncier the wickets were in the last Australian Ashes series compared to the previous one. Again, I have absolutely no problem with that. In 10/11 the wickets were like chalk and cheese compared to 13/14 (with the exception of WACA).

But it's this idea by some Australian supporters that England are somehow doing something unfairly in comparison to the way it's done in Australia which I can only laugh at. It's like there always has to be some excuse.

 

[Kalin]

Second test on the way... looks like another dead wicket.

From the Telegraph pre-game coverage:
'I saw a brilliant picture yesterday of the Lord's groundstaff removing pretty much every single solitary blade of grass from the pitch. One lad had a pair of tweezers, it looked like. Anyway, expect a slow track with little help for the seamers.'

However, AUS won the toss and are 104/1 and it should have been /0 if Warner, not content with hitting 4's off Moeen, had not tried to hit a 6. So the slow wicket working against England so far.

 

[MatsPhilander]

Don't see how it is of any advantage unless England have a world class spinner.

 

[Kalin]

They don't, but AUS has the faster bowlers... or at least the common thinking is they play better on fast, bouncy pitches. This is not to help England but to dull down the AUS pace attack. Worked like a charm in Cardiff.

 

[Kalin]

Ricky Ponting's opinion on today's wicket:

“The administrators that ask for a wicket like this to be prepared are also asking why nobody’s coming to watch Test cricket,”

AUS 180/1 so far...

 

[oztennisfan]

I'm not wrong, it was widely known how much bouncier the wickets were in the last Australian Ashes series compared to the previous one. Again, I have absolutely no problem with that. In 10/11 the wickets were like chalk and cheese compared to 13/14 (with the exception of WACA).

But it's this idea by some Australian supporters that England are somehow doing something unfairly in comparison to the way it's done in Australia which I can only laugh at. It's like there always has to be some excuse.

our pitches play the same no matter who plays here.... we will forever go in circles but that is the case.

 

[oztennisfan]

Don't see how it is of any advantage unless England have a world class spinner.

its because of our fast bowlers...

 

[oztennisfan]

handy first day..... what was warner thinking, threw away a massive one..

 

[Feña14]

handy first day..... what was warner thinking, threw away a massive one..

He really did yeah.

After an hour a friend said to me "if ever there was a pitch to break Lara's 400, this is it". England can't win the game from here so kind of hoping Smith can have a good crack at it.

700+ and try to bowl England out twice on the last two days when they're exhausted and the pitch is misbehaving looks like being the way to go.

 

[Kalin]

handy first day..... what was warner thinking, threw away a massive one..

Well, Warner's stupidity seems to have served as a good warning to Rogers and Smith at least.

The British press is savaging the state of the wicket ... but if it had been England at 337/1 they'd be knighting the Head groundskeeper just about now. At least everyone is now freely acknowldeging that the wickets are doctored on orders of the English Cricket Board and more is to be expected in the following tests.

 

[Feña14]

Well, Warner's stupidity seems to have served as a good warning to Rogers and Smith at least.

The British press is savaging the state of the wicket ... but if it had been England at 337/1 they'd be knighting the Head groundskeeper just about now. At least everyone is now freely acknowldeging that the wickets are doctored on orders of the English Cricket Board and more is to be expected in the following tests.

Nah, it's all about balance between bat and ball. Nobody enjoys a game that's influenced so much by the toss of a coin. The groundsman has said how disappointed he is with it, rain in the build up has made it soft when he was hoping for sun to bake it, Lords will probably get fined for it (and rightly so). My guess is it will be pretty good for bowling on the 3rd day onwards, which is what he'd hoped for on the first day.

Let's face it, England need a pitch with movement to take 20 wickets, Australia need one with pace and bounce. Specifically asking for a pitch that has neither hurts England just as much as it does Australia.

 

[Kalin]

Nah, it's all about balance between bat and ball. Nobody enjoys a game that's influenced so much by the toss of a coin. The groundsman has said how disappointed he is with it, rain in the build up has made it soft when he was hoping for sun to bake it, Lords will probably get fined for it (and rightly so). My guess is it will be pretty good for bowling on the 3rd day onwards, which is what he'd hoped for on the first day.

Let's face it, England need a pitch with movement to take 20 wickets, Australia need one with pace and bounce. Specifically asking for a pitch that has neither hurts England just as much as it does Australia.

Also true... but there were reports (with pictures, even) showing the grounds crew brushing down and removing all vestiges of grass which supposedly slows it down even more. I do believe that the ECB has given 'suggestions' as they should; every country has the right to choose pitches that suit their style best; same in Davis Cup tennis (even more dramatic, actually). But yes, I do doubt they had asked for a pitch which might end up suiting Australia better.

As you say, pitches like this seem to put too much weight on the outcome of the toss. Somebody was suggesting that there should be a toss for the first test only and then they should alternate. But then it will really allow for pitches to be doctored when you know your side will definitely get to choose

I have to clarify that I'm not Aussie and by no means am I a cricket expert; I just enjoy the sport and the Ashes in particular. Following the English press during the Ashes is always lots of fun; seeing the mood change from ecstasy to despair and back with every fall of wicket or a big four from either side.

 

[Feña14]

Also true... but there were reports (with pictures, even) showing the grounds crew brushing down and removing all vestiges of grass which supposedly slows it down even more. I do believe that the ECB has given 'suggestions' as they should; every country has the right to choose pitches that suit their style best; same in Davis Cup tennis (even more dramatic, actually). But yes, I do doubt they had asked for a pitch which might end up suiting Australia better.

As you say, pitches like this seem to put too much weight on the outcome of the toss. Somebody was suggesting that there should be a toss for the first test only and then they should alternate. But then it will really allow for pitches to be doctored when you know your side will definitely get to choose

I have to clarify that I'm not Aussie and by no means am I a cricket expert; I just enjoy the sport and the Ashes in particular. Following the English press during the Ashes is always lots of fun; seeing the mood change from ecstasy to despair and back with every fall of wicket or a big four from either side.

Yeah agree on the media side of things, during the Ashes i've always been into reading the Australian papers and seeing how they have the same kinds of stories, just with a slight Australian bias as opposed to the English one lol. Pretty funny!

Regarding the pitches, Nottingham actually got fined last year for having a pitch that was as slow and low as this one (so far). The game was a bore draw of the highest order. The opponent? India.. We had a similar easy paced pitch, took spin and had no movement against Sri Lanka last year, we lost the series.

So yeah, can't see any reason why the ECB would be demanding pitches that play like Nagpur against sub continent teams. This series we're getting the same pitches as we have done the last few years, but Australia seem to think it's specifically for them, when in reality they're just the norm over here these days.

Something seriously needs to be done about it because whatever the groudsmen are doing now isn't working. New methods of preparing them, new soil, drainage systems.. whatever it takes.

 

[Kalin]

Yeah agree on the media side of things, during the Ashes i've always been into reading the Australian papers and seeing how they have the same kinds of stories, just with a slight Australian bias as opposed to the English one lol. Pretty funny!

Regarding the pitches, Nottingham actually got fined last year for having a pitch that was as slow and low as this one (so far). The game was a bore draw of the highest order. The opponent? India.. We had a similar easy paced pitch, took spin and had no movement against Sri Lanka last year, we lost the series.

So yeah, can't see any reason why the ECB would be demanding pitches that play like Nagpur against sub continent teams. This series we're getting the same pitches as we have done the last few years, but Australia seem to think it's specifically for them, when in reality they're just the norm over here these days.

Something seriously needs to be done about it because whatever the groudsmen are doing now isn't working. New methods of preparing them, new soil, drainage systems.. whatever it takes.

Good points. Such pitches are good for the occasional record-setting batting performance (Rogers already has his best-ever Test score and Smith is gunning for his first ever double century) but I don't want to be the bowler who has to perform on such tracks day after day. Spectators also get bored and attendance suffers long-term.

There was an article which said it very bluntly- some of these venues work very hard to get one big-time Test match and they're willing to go a long way to ensure the test lasts for the full 5 days because it brings them more revenue.; long-term spectator interest be da*ned. Didn't work out in Cardiff, obviously

 

[MatsPhilander]

They don't, but AUS has the faster bowlers... or at least the common thinking is they play better on fast, bouncy pitches. This is not to help England but to dull down the AUS pace attack. Worked like a charm in Cardiff.

Broad, Wood & Anderson are pretty fast bowlers-all you are doing is dulling them as well. Probably more an ECB directive to ensure games go 5 days or as near as possible.

 

[oztennisfan]

Broad, Wood & Anderson are pretty fast bowlers-all you are doing is dulling them as well. Probably more an ECB directive to ensure games go 5 days or as near as possible.

but australia are used to batting on hard bouncy wickets, we always have struggled on low spinning wickets which is why we always struggle on the sub continent but havent lost a series in south africa since they came back to test cricket.

 

[oztennisfan]

Yeah agree on the media side of things, during the Ashes i've always been into reading the Australian papers and seeing how they have the same kinds of stories, just with a slight Australian bias as opposed to the English one lol. Pretty funny!

never read the nonsene thats trotted out in (ours and i assume your) media, they sensationalise and cater for people who dont really know whats going on.

 

[Peters]

..we will forever go in circles but that is the case.

Yep, disagree completely. The difference between the pitches in those 2 Ashes series seriously helped Mitchell Johnson 2nd time round.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this. Both countries in theory produce pitches to maximise their chances of playing to their strengths. You can try stating your opinion as fact as much as you like, but it won't change anything I'm afraid.

 

[Feña14]

never read the nonsene thats trotted out in (ours and i assume your) media, they sensationalise and cater for people who dont really know whats going on.

That's all part of the fun! McGrath taking sly digs at England, our lot saying Australia are dinosaurs etc.. Bit of a sporting version of Neighbours inbetween Tests whets the appetite

Broad, Wood & Anderson are pretty fast bowlers-all you are doing is dulling them as well. Probably more an ECB directive to ensure games go 5 days or as near as possible.

Yeah the making sure games go the distance theory would be the only one that makes any kind of sense. Australia have Starc and Johnson who are capable of bowling wicket taking balls at any moment, on any pitch. England are the ones who need help from the conditions to take 20 wickets. Making a pitch that plays like Mumbai is a disaster for us (we don't even have the better spinner!), unfortunately we've seen alot of that the last 2-3 years.

 

[oztennisfan]

Yep, disagree completely. The difference between the pitches in those 2 Ashes series seriously helped Mitchell Johnson 2nd time round.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this. Both countries in theory produce pitches to maximise their chances of playing to their strengths. You can try stating your opinion as fact as much as you like, but it won't change anything I'm afraid.

mitchell johnson was injury free and bowling the best he ever has in his career the second time around. i really dont think you have seen much cricket from australia other than the odd ashes test series, thats obvious, if you had you would know exactly what pitches we have here, quite comical to think otherwise. brisbane bounces just as much as perth, we havent lost a test against anyone in brisbane for 27 years. we play 5 tests here in a few months, i can tell you now exactly how every pitch will play, there will be no surprises, they always play the same.

 

[oztennisfan]

That's all part of the fun! McGrath taking sly digs at England, our lot saying Australia are dinosaurs etc.. Bit of a sporting version of Neighbours inbetween Tests whets the appetite



Yeah the making sure games go the distance theory would be the only one that makes any kind of sense. Australia have Starc and Johnson who are capable of bowling wicket taking balls at any moment, on any pitch. England are the ones who need help from the conditions to take 20 wickets. Making a pitch that plays like Mumbai is a disaster for us (we don't even have the better spinner!), unfortunately we've seen alot of that the last 2-3 years.

mcgrath back us to win 5-0 every series, even when he played he said that at the start of each series..... last time out here i remember botham and the rest coming out here saying its the worst aussie side he has ever seen, said it would be a 5-0 win for england....he got the 5-0 part right...

 

[Kalin]

Well, AUS have taken their first English wicket with their second ball of the innings.... maybe the grounds men at Lords are reading our thread...

 

[oztennisfan]

getting close to 150kph, when johnson makes runs....

 

[Peters]

mitchell johnson was injury free and bowling the best he ever has in his career the second time around. i really dont think you have seen much cricket from australia other than the odd ashes test series, thats obvious, if you had you would know exactly what pitches we have here, quite comical to think otherwise. brisbane bounces just as much as perth, we havent lost a test against anyone in brisbane for 27 years. we play 5 tests here in a few months, i can tell you now exactly how every pitch will play, there will be no surprises, they always play the same.

Again, you're calling a different opinion to yours 'comical' which says a lot about you. This is the problem I come across a lot with Aussie fans - it's quite obvious how much more bouncy the wickets in 2013 were for Johnson compared to the same ones a few years earlier.

It doesn't matter how correct you think you are, there is another viewpoint. Whether you like it or not. And it's a perfectly valid one - both countries are not going to allow their wickets to suit the opposing bowlers over their own, at least to the best of their efforts anyway.

 

[oztennisfan]

Again, you're calling a different opinion to yours 'comical' which says a lot about you. This is the problem I come across a lot with Aussie fans - it's quite obvious how much more bouncy the wickets in 2013 were for Johnson compared to the same ones a few years earlier.

It doesn't matter how correct you think you are, there is another viewpoint. Whether you like it or not. And it's a perfectly valid one - both countries are not going to allow their wickets to suit the opposing bowlers over their own, at least to the best of their efforts anyway.

please, im going on watching test cricket played here every year for over 30 years, our pitches havent changed.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

Second Test is done now.

 

[Peters]

please, im going on watching test cricket played here every year for over 30 years, our pitches havent changed.

I disagree. Due to how much bouncier the wickets visibly were in 13/14, apart from the WACA, saying otherwise. Coming from someone who's been watching test cricket for xxx number of years, etc..

Not really much more we can say here is there? We'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[oztennisfan]

yep...

 

[MatsPhilander]

Just confirms what we have been seeing from England for years now-they struggle to bat time, in the first test they batted quickly & did enough to win, but here when they needed to consolidate they again folded playing stupid shots. They bat best on quicker wickets where they can make runs quickly. For the days of Atherton, Hussain, Thorpe etc who could occupy the crease for long periods of time.

Australia made a mockery of England's performance by batting with no trouble to declare on the pitch England had capitulated on first innings & the second innings score is pathetic.

 

[Wynter]

Again, you're calling a different opinion to yours 'comical' which says a lot about you. This is the problem I come across a lot with Aussie fans - it's quite obvious how much more bouncy the wickets in 2013 were for Johnson compared to the same ones a few years earlier.

It doesn't matter how correct you think you are, there is another viewpoint. Whether you like it or not. And it's a perfectly valid one - both countries are not going to allow their wickets to suit the opposing bowlers over their own, at least to the best of their efforts anyway.

Johnson back then was completely out of form and in 2013/14 hit an absolute purple patch and ran over everyone, two completely different players. Especially considering when Johnson was called up for the Ashes the decision was met with derision by 98% of Australia who already wanted him replaced with Starc.

To put it into perspective prior to that series his average was 30.8 or so and since then it's hovered between 27-28. He and Lillee reworked his action over those two years, the pitches were the same it was Johnson who changed.

 

[Feña14]

Just confirms what we have been seeing from England for years now-they struggle to bat time, in the first test they batted quickly & did enough to win, but here when they needed to consolidate they again folded playing stupid shots. They bat best on quicker wickets where they can make runs quickly. For the days of Atherton, Hussain, Thorpe etc who could occupy the crease for long periods of time.

Australia made a mockery of England's performance by batting with no trouble to declare on the pitch England had capitulated on first innings & the second innings score is pathetic.

Batting time has been our strength the last 5 or so years. The number of Test's we've saved from impossible situations is way more than it should be. Australia at Cardiff in '09 (Collingwood), we did it 2 games in a row against South Africa (Pietersen, Bell), Brisbane in 2010 (Cook and Trott), New Zealand (Prior) etc.. The last 12 months have been awful though yeah, 12 of the last 14 innings we've been 30-3 or worse. How we manage to win any games with those stats, i'll never know.

We were always going to lose this series, Australia are just far better in every department for that not to be the case. My hope was we would lose the right way and put up a fight. Losing is fine, the way it happened? Not acceptable.

 

[MatsPhilander]

Batting time has been our strength the last 5 or so years. The number of Test's we've saved from impossible situations is way more than it should be. Australia at Cardiff in '09 (Collingwood), we did it 2 games in a row against South Africa (Pietersen, Bell), Brisbane in 2010 (Cook and Trott), New Zealand (Prior) etc.. The last 12 months have been awful though yeah, 12 of the last 14 innings we've been 30-3 or worse. How we manage to win any games with those stats, i'll never know.

We were always going to lose this series, Australia are just far better in every department for that not to be the case. My hope was we would lose the right way and put up a fight. Losing is fine, the way it happened? Not acceptable.

I was thinking more the last few years & not a last wicket stand saving it-the actual batsmen & it seems to be a general malaise in the game now for the most part with the prevalence of the 20/20 mindset.

This series is far from over-it could go either way. I don't think this Australia team is that great-better than the one here 2 years ago yes, but probably on a par with the 1986/1987 side-workmanlike but totally unspectacular.

 

[Peters]

Johnson back then was completely out of form and in 2013/14 hit an absolute purple patch and ran over everyone, two completely different players. Especially considering when Johnson was called up for the Ashes the decision was met with derision by 98% of Australia who already wanted him replaced with Starc.

To put it into perspective prior to that series his average was 30.8 or so and since then it's hovered between 27-28. He and Lillee reworked his action over those two years, the pitches were the same it was Johnson who changed.

No, I disagree about the pitches. They were visibly more bouncy.

Even Anderson was managing to get some proper bounce in 13/14, although it's not his game/strength so didn't really help him a huge amount.

 

[Feña14]

I was thinking more the last few years & not a last wicket stand saving it-the actual batsmen & it seems to be a general malaise in the game now for the most part with the prevalence of the 20/20 mindset.

This series is far from over-it could go either way. I don't think this Australia team is that great-better than the one here 2 years ago yes, but probably on a par with the 1986/1987 side-workmanlike but totally unspectacular.

Yeah saving a game with an epic 5 session performance on a wearing pitch doesn't happen as much these days. We've done it alot in the recent past, but it's usually just the one batsman going big and the tail hanging on for dear life in the final few overs.

The difference between the sides for me is the bowlers, Johnson especially. Even if England didn't have the whole 30-3 thing going on, Johnson would still be the difference maker. Put him in the England side and i'd bet he would do the same to the Australian lineup. A slingy left armer bowling 92mph+ is so rare, any batsmen of any generation can be out at any moment to that kind of quality. He's done it to South Africa before and they're far and away the best lineup in the game imo.

Bowl like he did at Cardiff and we're in with a chance, on top form though? There's only going to be one outcome.

 

[MatsPhilander]

If he fires he is nearly unplayable, when he doesn't he sucks fierce. It was more the way England just capitulated. Australia can get life out of any pitch so England have to go for quick wickets with movement-they don't have swing bowlers the quality of Anderson.

 

[Wynter]

The difference between the Aus team here and the one we brought over is simply confidence, confidence which has come from when we won 5-0 and took back the #1 ranking by winning in SA a few months later.

Plus Steve Smith and Warner making the grade as test batsmen with both averaging 50+. If Harris had been able to make one last series, you guys would've been completely ****ed in all honesty.

Plus you're team has gone downhill massively from 13

 

[Feña14]

The difference between the Aus team here and the one we brought over is simply confidence, confidence which has come from when we won 5-0 and took back the #1 ranking by winning in SA a few months later.

Plus Steve Smith and Warner making the grade as test batsmen with both averaging 50+. If Harris had been able to make one last series, you guys would've been completely ****ed in all honesty.

Plus you're team has gone downhill massively from 13

Yeah i'd said before the series that this has come a year too soon for England. Root will take over as captain, new director only been in place a matter of weeks, same for the coach, young team still finding their way etc..

For Australia it's perfect timing, one last crack at winning in England for Rogers, Clarke and Johnson. Smith in great form and all that. They've been building up to this series specifically the last two years, they'll probably have to rebuild after though. Guess we'll find out next winter which side did the better job of it!

 

[Feña14]

Good to see those Ashes back where they rightfully belong

 

[Midaso240]

Good to see those Ashes back where they rightfully belong

The actual Ashes Urn never leaves England whether Australia win or lose the series...

 

[Feña14]

The actual Ashes Urn never leaves England whether Australia win or lose the series...

Obviously. It's a pretty common saying...
Australia have never held the Ashes if we want to go down the pernickity route, which is fine by me

 

[oztennisfan]

we were abysmal, batting was disgraceful. will be mass changes now, cant do anything but make wholesale changes now. we will be alright our shield cricket system continually produces great cricketers.

 

[Bartelby]

The trouble with test cricket is that too much depends on who wins the toss and whether they make the right decision.

England batting first in the third and the fourth test would have seen a much closer result.

But overall the Australian batting team were incapable of adapting to English conditions.

 

[Feña14]

The trouble with test cricket is that too much depends on who wins the toss and whether they make the right decision.

England batting first in the third and the fourth test would have seen a much closer result.

But overall the Australian batting team were incapable of adapting to English conditions.

Australia won the toss in the third test...

You're right though, it does come down to conditions, even more so these days. We go to South Africa this winter and it wouldn't be a huge surprise if they hammer us, even Pakistan in a few months will probably beat us as the ball won't swing and we don't play spin that well.

 

[Bartelby]

Yes, they won the toss but made the wrong decision, so it was their bad ... but still it seems to make an enormous difference to win the toss and get it right.

It's hard, for me at least, to think of another sport where this matters so much - perhaps chess, if you like to think of that as a sport.

Sometimes in golf the earlier starters play with little wind and the later ones with a gale, so it can play a role there in the first two rounds.

 

[Peters]

I think it's true to some small extent - but not all the way to getting defeated this heavily. The ball was swinging, but not prodigiously, I've seen far more lateral movement in matches over the years compared to the last two. You can bet anything you like South Africa would have provided England a decent match had they batted first here.

Australian batsmen simply go at the ball too hard, all the time, English/SA batsmen seem to have more flexibility in that regard. England played and missed a lot here also - but they simply knew to hang back in the crease and play very late, which minimises the chance of an edge. There's a technique which negates the effect of the swing.

For once, I agree with something Boycott said, they were like lemmings throwing themselves off a cliff the way they kept swinging the bat wildly at everything - as if they were batting on a featherbed. Suicide tbh.

Which is a shame in one regard, since it ruined any chance of a good contest. But I wouldn't even think of looking at the conditions as the main reason for the heavy defeats.

 

[Feña14]

I think it's true to some small extent - but not all the way to getting defeated this heavily. The ball was swinging, but not prodigiously, I've seen far more lateral movement in matches over the years compared to the last two. You can bet anything you like South Africa would have provided England a decent match had they batted first here.

Australian batsmen simply go at the ball too hard, all the time, English/SA batsmen seem to have more flexibility in that regard. England played and missed a lot here also - but they simply knew to hang back in the crease and play very late, which minimises the chance of an edge. There's a technique which negates the effect of the swing.

For once, I agree with something Boycott said, they were like lemmings throwing themselves off a cliff the way they kept swinging the bat wildly at everything - as if they were batting on a featherbed. Suicide tbh.

Which is a shame in one regard, since it ruined any chance of a good contest. But I wouldn't even think of looking at the conditions as the main reason for the heavy defeats.

That's true. Dale Steyn vs Anderson in those conditions would of been incredible to see, wouldn't fancy being a batsmen on either side!

There is no movement in Australia, they just play through the line of the ball, go hard at it and it kind of papers over the cracks. You can't blame them for it, those are the conditions they grow up with. We saw with Smith at Lords when there was no movement that he thrives in those conditions, bit of nip off the seam though and it's only a matter of time before he's going to be getting out.

You have to wonder if other sides around the world will of noticed that and attempt to produce similar wickets when facing them. Very hard to do in Asia, but South Africa and New Zealand can do it.

 

[Chicharito]

#StraussLogic

 

[Deleted member 733170]

Comisserations Aussie cricketing fans. You finally have a taste of what it feels like to be an English cricketing fan.