TOPIC:

Is it just me or is anyone else sick to death of the constant whinging and whining of the English players and media about the circumstances of this series, feeling like they are the better side or the rain denied them victory or lecturing everyone about the proper way to play the game and the "spirit" of cricket.

Honestly they are so far up their own arses that they have failed to recognise that in fact they threw away match winning positions in the first two tests by their own reckless batting. They have also had by far the better of the conditions with Australia often batting in gloomy overhead conditions with the sun coming out and the pitch flattening for the English Bazballers. Didnt hear too much complaining from the Australian camp about this, its just cricket get on with it. And yet when the weather finally turns against England, the moaning never stops.

The reality is that Australia are leading the series 2-1 and have retained the ashes because they have played the big moments in two of the tests better.

Having said that of course, Australia need to turn around momentum to win the 5th test and the series and the only way they can achieve that I reckon is to change their tactics significantly, particularly in the field. Every batsman is vulnerable to nicking off in the first 20 balls of their innings, particularly guys like Crawley, Duckett and Brook so instead of employing boundary riders from the start of an innings why not have 3-4 slips and instruct the bowlers to pitch it up and give them a chance to break through. Sure if a batsman settles in and starts scoring fast, put a few boundary riders back but setting more attacking field give the message to the batsmen that we are trying to get you out. Its a mindset and intent thing that can then make the fielding team a lot more positive. Wouldn't it be better to have England 2-50 after 5 overs rather than cruising at 0-25 and taking easy singles and twos. You have to take a few risks to bowl a team out. Also the bowlers need to bowl full and straight at Wood, Broad and the rest of the tail, that will get them out a lot quicker than short stuff which should be used only sparingly.

Labusagne in his second innings century at Manchester showed the other batsmen what their approach should be in this test. He went out with a definite plan to all the English bowlers and frustrated them. Smith and Head particularly need to have a strategy to combat the short ball and stick to it. Warner should be told just to go out and imagine its a 20/20 and start playing some shots.

gtr....never said it wasn't a great innings....but don't forget Aust bowled too short to Stokes,  Harris dropped a gimme, Lyon missed an easy run  out, Paine stuffed up a DRS, all examples of poor bowling, fielding and tactics by the Aust under the JL tenure...seems to me folk are quick to highlight all those discipline misdemeanors under McDonald's bus driving tenure, yet when Langer drives the bus, its all hunky dory.......both coaches are far from perfect.....just seems like one is an easier target.

mikeh wrote:

Is it just me or is anyone else sick to death of the constant whinging and whining of the English players and media about the circumstances of this series, feeling like they are the better side or the rain denied them victory or lecturing everyone about the proper way to play the game and the "spirit" of cricket.

Honestly they are so far up their own arses that they have failed to recognise that in fact they threw away match winning positions in the first two tests by their own reckless batting. They have also had by far the better of the conditions with Australia often batting in gloomy overhead conditions with the sun coming out and the pitch flattening for the English Bazballers. Didnt hear too much complaining from the Australian camp about this, its just cricket get on with it. And yet when the weather finally turns against England, the moaning never stops.

The reality is that Australia are leading the series 2-1 and have retained the ashes because they have played the big moments in two of the tests better.

Having said that of course, Australia need to turn around momentum to win the 5th test and the series and the only way they can achieve that I reckon is to change their tactics significantly, particularly in the field. Every batsman is vulnerable to nicking off in the first 20 balls of their innings, particularly guys like Crawley, Duckett and Brook so instead of employing boundary riders from the start of an innings why not have 3-4 slips and instruct the bowlers to pitch it up and give them a chance to break through. Sure if a batsman settles in and starts scoring fast, put a few boundary riders back but setting more attacking field give the message to the batsmen that we are trying to get you out. Its a mindset and intent thing that can then make the fielding team a lot more positive. Wouldn't it be better to have England 2-50 after 5 overs rather than cruising at 0-25 and taking easy singles and twos. You have to take a few risks to bowl a team out. Also the bowlers need to bowl full and straight at Wood, Broad and the rest of the tail, that will get them out a lot quicker than short stuff which should be used only sparingly.

Labusagne in his second innings century at Manchester showed the other batsmen what their approach should be in this test. He went out with a definite plan to all the English bowlers and frustrated them. Smith and Head particularly need to have a strategy to combat the short ball and stick to it. Warner should be told just to go out and imagine it's a 20/20 and start playing some shots.

Dunno about you Mike but who cares if the Poms whinge?  They're always aggrieved about something...always have been and always will.  They tear into their own when something goes wrong and put them up on a pedestal when they do well.  At day's end, they're just Poms and that says it all to me. 

Freeze your like a dog with a bone.You just won't let go.
Langers mediocrity in the job.The main reason for Warner's current form .
And the greatest  strategic mind,in World Cricket.The current Australian Manager .
 

The reason the English have gone on about it a tad, reasonably enough, is that very few Ashes matches have been so badly wrecked since the infamous Sydney game in 1970. The boards argeed to play another test to compensate on that occassion, The boards can solve this again; if England wins the fifth test, another match could be played at the start of the next English summer. India went back to finish a series in England recently, all it needs is Anglo-Saxon pragmatism and good sense. You could also insist that such a test would be played to the end as was done in the 1930s in South Africa and Australia. 

Sorry AR I will beg to disagree with you on that one. The 1970 test  (which was actually in Melbourne) the entire match was washed out so that is why the ACB and the MCC arranged for another test to be added. The only reason India came back for a deciding test last year was because of a COVID outbreak in their camp.

Rain has been a factor in tests in England forever, especially in Manchester. In fact 10 years ago almost to the day, England retained the ashes via a washout when Australia were in a dominant position in a test.  There was nothing said then about adding an extra match to compensate. In fact England were celebrating their "good luck" quite openly out on the balcony. Total hypocrisy. You just can't bend the rules for England just because they feel they were robbed.


 

Cut out Mike, it is suppose to be a tour of goodwill.  You have missed the point, India did not have to go back, but did so to maintain good relations. In 1972, they added a sixth day so Australia could make it 2-2 each. Do you re-call this? No, of course not. 

I do remember 1972, that sixth day was a tour condition negotiated at the start of the series which was triggered if the series was still live when the final test was played. It wasn't something that was added as a goodwill gesture at the end of the series. To my knowledge this coming test at the Oval is a 5 day test so that condition doesn't exist any more.
 

Ponting seems to have missed the point about 'bazball' completely, claiming it has failed. As others have said with aplomb above, surely not Ponting? Australia conceeded 400 in quick time without taking 20 wickets, apparently, once again, because of good English genorosity of spirit coupled with bad fielding. How can he claim that Bazball has failed when England made 600 in the third test? The most important component of it, rightly or wrongly, is the batting side. Every single one of the Englanders have made some runs in the series. 

Starc and Mitch Marsh both been declared fit.