A Lions series win or retaining the Ashes?

The thought occurred to me yesterday evening: if I had to choose, on pain of death, between a Lions series win and England (and Wales) retaining the Ashes, which would it be?

Which would you choose?

For any Aussies, which would you prefer: beating the Lions or winning back the Ashes?

Well i assume Scotland Ireland and probably Wales couldnt care less about England v Aussie for the Ashes.

Personally as an Englishman...can we not win both

I folow rugby not cricket, so easy choice.

What are the Ashes?

Ashes without about.

RuggerRadge2611 wrote:What are the Ashes?

It's a little statuette of David Bowie. The England and Australia captains roshambo for it every couple of years.

I like cricket but don't feel part of the England cricket team, even though it apparently represents Wales too. I feel like I'm on the outside looking in. Therefore, Lions 100% for me.

Griff wrote:I like cricket but don't feel part of the England cricket team, even though it apparently represents Wales too.  I feel like I'm on the outside looking in.  Therefore, Lions 100% for me.

AH, that would be because your not South African.

Irrelevant question as E&W will win the Ashes home and away by a country mile.

Tiger, I'm uncomfortable with us being such strong favourites for the Ashes. The Aussies never know when they're beaten.

What a stupid question to put on a rugby forum
That Ashes trophy is $hite anyway.

Thanks for that, Mr Agreeable.

Good luck to Engerland in the Ashes, I hope they score loads of home runs and don't strike out too often.

Cricket is nonsense

That'll be that cricket thingy I've heard so much about.

Getting my nipples burnt off, my toe nails pulled out, being water boarded or being force fed cement would be things I would consider more enjoyable than watching test match cricket.

One day stuff isn't bad though.

I'd rather Tahiti won the confederations cup than watch England win the Ashes!

Why?

Coz cricket is just rounders for folk that cannot run in a circle!

tigertattie wrote:I'd rather Tahiti won the confederations cup than watch England win the Ashes!

Why?

Coz cricket is just rounders for folk that cannot run in a circle!

Neither can people who do rounders

They run in a diamond, except to the home base which is a separate base, at right-angles to third base and the batsman's base




An answer the question


Lions


International cricket is so overdone now, it is like a conference league 


and take about an outdated concept the ashes is just like every other set of tests

Well apart from the 2005 which Wales were prominent in a magnificent win, I'd go for the Ashes as it's usually an English thingy.

Mind you if there were six Tigers in the Lions side in (and fundamental to a) series-winning test, I might be half pressed to decide.

I have enjoyed playing cricket in the past. My school was one of the few in Ireland with a cricket crease. I have even been to an Australian test match v South Africa in the SCG and will soon be joining the Leinster cricket club. Believe it or not even though I am half Australian I would be supporting England in the ashes if I was arsed watching it but I am really not so a Lions win would be preferable.

greytiger wrote:Well apart from the 2005 which Wales were prominent in a magnificent win, I'd go for the Ashes as it's usually an English thingy.

Mind you if there were six Tigers in the Lions side in (and fundamental to a) series-winning test, I might be half pressed to decide.

Thats the spirit Tiger, just support the Leicester contingent.

I know there's an Irish lad on the team, and I do find it hard to get really into the Lions at times, but Lions. Not a fan of test cricket, 20/20 is decent enough.

I love Test cricket. Not so fussed on the one-day game and Twenty20.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I love Test cricket. Not so fussed on the one-day game and Twenty20.

I found it a little boring I must say. Any sport where the crowd have to entertain themselves by making a beer snake must surely be doing something wrong?

The IPL is good to watch, and it is something that you can kind of watch for a good 20 minutes within getting too invested in. Test Cricket to me is like Baseball it is long and drawn out and doesn't capture my attention in any great detail.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:Tiger, I'm uncomfortable with us being such strong favourites for the Ashes. The Aussies never know when they're beaten.

Hi Lucky.

It's a very tall order but I'd be happy with a few good sessions to start with. The 1st Test will be critical of course.
Australia maybe have a 40% chance of winning that (note: that's up from 30%!). If they manage a massive upset then it will be 'game on' as they say and anything can happen. Remember 1989?... but we'd need quite a few future stars to rise over the next few months. Can't see that happening though and it's more likely to be a 4-1 or 3-1 England win I'd say..

Now for the Lions Tour. We desperately need to make amends for last Saturday. Well obviously...
So I've tipped the Lions by 4 this time. Did I tell you my recent tipping form is completely hopeless?

Deep down I think the Wallabies can't possibly have such a poor start again and miss so many sitters. That was bloody hopeless.
There will be a lift in the intensity for sure. The Lions also have scope to play much better than they did last week. Get POC's replacement in (whoever that may be)... and Tommy... but don't tamper with the team too much.

It's just my gut feeling but I think if the Wallabies can level it up then the 3rd Test will be perfectly set up for a repeat of 2001 as our guys get a roll on and confidence builds up. We like doing things the hard way. Don't ask me why. Just watch that video again!!!

If the Lions win the series on Saturday -  well, they will have most definitely deserved to lift the Tom Richards Trophy (considering their horror run with injuries as well) and I'll be buying more drinks than usual when Stag, Hound & Co hit town. I'll be happy to see them all smiles if that's the case. I'll also make sure they don't decide to go for a late night swim in the harbour after 16 pints.  

Sorry Lucky. I didn't answer your question properly. It's too hard to split. They both mean so much to an Aussie. An Ashes win would probably be more 'valuable' for Australia in terms of lifting the national psyche... however, I'm kind of greedy (in a nice way) and I am praying for a comeback of gargantuan proportions in the next two Lions matches.

If we lose both the Lions and the Ashes - then I'm more than happy with Adam Scott's Masters win this year.

Any game that takes 5 days to play belongs to a different era.  I'll take 80 minutes of brutality every time.

Some of those cricket matches are 5 days of brutality though!

Plus you get to sleep on it for 4 nights...

It's a great game too.

Linebreaker wrote:Some of those cricket matches are 5 days of brutality though!

Plus you get to sleep on it for 4 nights...

It's a great game too.

Really? You sure your not confusing brutality and boredom?

20-20 seems like a decent enough game, I can handle watching that. There are not too many breaks etc. But full blown test cricket suffers the same problems as NFL, the game itself is not too long and fairly enjoyable, but the amount of time that nothing is really happening is mindnumbing.

GunsGerms wrote:

greytiger wrote:Well apart from the 2005 which Wales were prominent in a magnificent win, I'd go for the Ashes as it's usually an English thingy.

Mind you if there were six Tigers in the Lions side in (and fundamental to a) series-winning test, I might be half pressed to decide.

Thats the spirit Tiger, just support the Leicester contingent.

I know. Sad that anyone who supports his home town and his own country could be so bizarre.

The Ashes will most likely carry it for me. The passion of the Ashes is always so intense whereas the Lions in the professional era has lost its edge.

SS when you're at an NFL game, the stops actually don't bother you too much, always highlights up on the big screen and other things. At home, it can be a problem if you're not a big fan of it I agree.

Thomond wrote:SS when you're at an NFL game, the stops actually don't bother you too much, always highlights up on the big screen and other things. At home, it can be a problem if you're not a big fan of it I agree.

Also if your not fanatical enough to stay up late to watch matches life and tape them, there is also the option of fast-forwarding (I missed Janet Jackson's mishap that way too), cuts it right down.

Ashes over Lions tour of Aus everytime.

Lions tour in SA or Ashes now that is a tough call?

Clearly the Lions for me, though both would be a bonus. 

There is just somethig about beating the Aussies which makes me all hot and bothered...........

ScarletSpiderman wrote:

Linebreaker wrote:Some of those cricket matches are 5 days of brutality though!

Plus you get to sleep on it for 4 nights...

It's a great game too.

Really?  You sure your not confusing brutality and boredom?

20-20 seems like a decent enough game, I can handle watching that.  There are not too many breaks etc.  But full blown test cricket suffers the same problems as NFL, the game itself is not too long and fairly enjoyable, but the amount of time that nothing is really happening is mindnumbing.

Yeah, for sure. Test matches are the pinnacle of a true sporting contest. Have you ever played or watched a game live?

20-20? You're joking aren't you? That's for people with small attention spans. So you must prefer 7s rugby to Test matches. Each to their own I suppose.

Lions

Rugby > Cricket for me

I remember the 2005 Ashes like it was yesterday, high sporting drama at its best.

I remember the 8 Ashes series wins in a row. It gets a bit too much after a while.

I was picking up my puppy springer spaniel on the morning that it became clear that the Ashes of 2005 were going to be won.

We called him Ash.

A week or or so later we got two kittens. One we called Shane (Warne), t'other Freddie (Flintoff).

What a great series!

LB - Funny enough a fellow Scarlets fan made a similar comment when I said I quite liked 20-20. I guess it is a bit like someone saying that union should ditch the scrums because they waste too much time.

I was roped into a few local games of cricket (really low level stuff), and I spend both times sat out on the boundary for half a day, then in a car park for the other half od a day waiting for my turn to bat (11th man, yep I that awful), both times I never actually got to hit the ball because the other batsman was bowled out.

But to the arguement, even though I am not a Lions fan, a Lions series win is far more important than the ashes IMO.

Linebreaker wrote:I remember the 8 Ashes series wins in a row. It gets a bit too much after a while.

One day Linebreaker I'm sure you'll get to refresh your ennui.
Just hang in there.

greytiger wrote:

Linebreaker wrote:I remember the 8 Ashes series wins in a row. It gets a bit too much after a while.

One day Linebreaker I'm sure you'll get to refresh your ennui.
Just hang in there.

I must admit I'm feeling a little peckish for it again.

Scarlet, you need to get out to a Test match this summer (in Birmingham?)... just for a day.
The buzz at the ground will captivate you I'm sure.

Lions victory or the Ashes? 

Hmmm, I know of the Ashes but nope, I don't have a blessed clue what goes on on a cricket field and I ain't British so.............................

A Lions team stuffed with Irish players winning a series?   Huh?  Too selfish?

ScarletSpiderman wrote:LB - Funny enough a fellow Scarlets fan made a similar comment when I said I quite liked 20-20.  I guess it is a bit like someone saying that union should ditch the scrums because they waste too much time.

I was roped into a few local games of cricket (really low level stuff), and I spend both times sat out on the boundary for half a day, then in a car park for the other half od a day waiting for my turn to bat (11th man, yep I that awful), both times I never actually got to hit the ball because the other batsman was bowled out.

But to the arguement, even though I am not a Lions fan, a Lions series win is far more important than the ashes IMO.

Ouch, sounds like you picked the wrong team to turn out for. I've played a couple of games over the last 3 weeks after a workmate roped me in to fill in for a (very) social team. The 1st game I turned up and said "well I used to be a batsman, but haven't played in 7 years" so they stuck me in at #5. I did promptly get out 1st ball, but they still offered me a bowl later on, and got asked what postion I wanted to field (slips, woohoo). On Sunday I turned up again, got asked if I wanted a bowl ("only if you're desperate"), fielded in close (I have a nicely bruised shin from being too slow to either catch (would have been a miracle) or dodge a shot. I got sent in again at #5, and scored a few runs helping the team through to a win. Sadly I didn't manage to hit the ball into the next county (the stream running alongside the field forms the border between Middlesex and Hertfordshire) though I had fun trying

It's years since I played cricket, but the thing that might not be apparent to a spectator is how alert you have to be in the field. Regardless of where you're fielding, you have to be alert every time the bowler runs in in case the ball comes to you. The only time you have a break is when it's your turn to bowl!

One of the things I love about Test cricket is precisely what other posters seem to dislike about it: how long a match lasts. I love how the match can hang in the balance overnight, how strategy can be adapted for the following morning. No other sport offers that.

Breaker, I think the whole Mickey Arthur / Darren Lehmann thing could prove to be a real boost for Australia. In a strange way, it could be just what they needed to pull together. I don't like it!

Linebreaker wrote:I remember the 8 Ashes series wins in a row. It gets a bit too much after a while.

Did that really happen? Must be so long ago I just can't remember. My mind strains to remember, but can't.
You really sure?
Was that in the 1800s?

No, much more recent than that, Doc.

1989 -2005... or 16 long years.

You get a bit tired after 10-12 years and start to feel sorry for the opposition.

The rugby looks the more interesting series...! Feel rather disenfranchised with cricket.

Why can't people enjoy more than one sport? It's like the rather churlish bashing of league on here.

There's room for all sorts of sport enjoyment.

The way that some of us union fans claim that it's the pinnacle of sportsmanship and way above everything else in terms of 'class' and 'skill' really does us no favours.

[/rantmodecancelled]