Ashes Summary: Eng got lucky with Tosses and Rains

So it's ended. .....a great masala entertainment spectacle comes to an end.....a bit soggy in the end but entertaining for most part neverthless.
 
Ashes Review: Same as summary in the headline
 
Verdict: There are undisputed champions ( like Obama in this presidential election)...and then there are situational winners ( like Bush winning his first term)
 
Any-way winner on record is what history will remeber so congratulations Eng.

Man of the Series: DRS
 
Positives
 
For England:
Bell
Chicken Tikka Masala flavoured desi pitches
 
For Aus in descending order:
Harris
Smith
Rogers
Lyon
Watson
Warner
Agar
 
Who has the momentum.......anyone's call

Bless KP_Fan, so bitter.    

yeah some serious luck when their bowlers have torn Aussie to pieces.  I have no idea how they get away with it.

what an absolute load of rubbish.

Just ignore the bowlers who swung the series.

troll out of ten.

Duty281 wrote:Bless KP_Fan, so bitter.    

Truth is bitter

trebellbobaggins wrote:yeah some serious luck when their bowlers have torn Aussie to pieces.  I have no idea how they get away with it.

what an absolute load of rubbish.

Just ignore the bowlers who swung the series.

troll out of ten.

only one game was a clear winner I think that was T2....rest of the series was either situational or governed by luck...and Eng defnitely was better on both counts

KP_fan wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Bless KP_Fan, so bitter.    

Truth is bitter

England 3-0 Australia.

Champions.

Duty281 wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Bless KP_Fan, so bitter.    

Truth is bitter

England 3-0 Australia.

Champions.

winners
situational winners
I already congratulated them

KP_fan wrote:

trebellbobaggins wrote:yeah some serious luck when their bowlers have torn Aussie to pieces.  I have no idea how they get away with it.

what an absolute load of rubbish.

Just ignore the bowlers who swung the series.

troll out of ten.

only one game was a clear winner I think that was T2....rest of the series was either situational or governed by luck...and Eng defnitely was better on both counts

yeah broads performance was pure luck last time.

Hmm. 3-0 certainly flatters England, who haven't really played that well

However Australia have probably played about as well as they could expect bar a few more Clarke specials, couple of their batsmen come off occasionally. They have a top class seam attack but no wicket taking spinner.

Australia will probably feel happier than when they arrived about their chances in the return series. Would've won at OT without rain intervention, and came very close at TB.

England will know they have quite a bit more in their locker, but they'll have to bring it out in Australia, with Swann unlikely to be given the conditions to be a factor.

So what you're saying KP_Fan, is that England have been good enough to totally dominate one test and to use good situations/luck to their advantage in 2 others, while Australia haven't been good enough to do either?
Is that it?

KP_fan wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Bless KP_Fan, so bitter.    

Truth is bitter

England 3-0 Australia.

Champions.

winners
situational winners
I already congratulated them

England 3-0 Australia.

Champions.

The main difference to me, when England were on top they knew how to press home their advantage.

trebellbobaggins wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

trebellbobaggins wrote:yeah some serious luck when their bowlers have torn Aussie to pieces.  I have no idea how they get away with it.

what an absolute load of rubbish.

Just ignore the bowlers who swung the series.

troll out of ten.

only one game was a clear winner I think that was T2....rest of the series was either situational or governed by luck...and Eng defnitely was better on both counts

yeah broads performance was pure luck last time.

He just performed...like is expected of him....in some games.

GSC wrote:The main difference to me, when England were on top they knew how to press home their advantage.

we will see when the pitches are not to doctors order and when tosses are lost

KP_fan wrote:

GSC wrote:The main difference to me, when England were on top they knew how to press home their advantage.

we will see when the pitches are not to doctors order and when tosses are lost

Oh dear, KP_fan still hasn't grasped the concept of how 'no rain' equals 'dry pitches'.

Hoggy_Bear wrote:So what you're saying KP_Fan, is that England have been good enough to totally dominate one test and to use good situations/luck to their advantage in 2 others, while Australia haven't been good enough to do either?
Is that it?

Toss is toss...you eitehr win it or not........Eng got lucky with toss 3 times..on designer pitches
and when they were not lucky with toss...rain bailed them

KP_fan wrote:

GSC wrote:The main difference to me, when England were on top they knew how to press home their advantage.

we will see when the pitches are not to doctors order and when tosses are lost

Well, they will be to doctors orders. Just the orders will be fast bouncy pitches.

Duty281 wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

GSC wrote:The main difference to me, when England were on top they knew how to press home their advantage.

we will see when the pitches are not to doctors order and when tosses are lost

Oh dear, KP_fan still hasn't grasped the concept of how 'no rain' equals 'dry pitches'.

Partly, but England also asked for turning wickets for Swann. Nothing wrong with it.

KP_fan wrote:

Hoggy_Bear wrote:So what you're saying KP_Fan, is that England have been good enough to totally dominate one test and to use good situations/luck to their advantage in 2 others, while Australia haven't been good enough to do either?
Is that it?

Toss is toss...you eitehr win it or not........Eng got lucky with toss 3 times
and when they were not lucky with toss...rain bailed them

England haven't been bailed out by the rain. There's no way anyone can know what would have happened if it hadn't rained at Manchester and they were well on the way to drawing this match rain or not.
You're simply making assumptions to support your argument. Assumptions don't prove anything, I'm afraid.

Hoggy_Bear wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

Hoggy_Bear wrote:So what you're saying KP_Fan, is that England have been good enough to totally dominate one test and to use good situations/luck to their advantage in 2 others, while Australia haven't been good enough to do either?
Is that it?

Toss is toss...you eitehr win it or not........Eng got lucky with toss 3 times
and when they were not lucky with toss...rain bailed them

England haven't been bailed out by the rain. There's no way anyone can know what would have happened if it hadn't rained at Manchester and they were well on the way to drawing this match rain or not.

Yeah..Yeah...we believe you:idea: 

Duty281 wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Bless KP_Fan, so bitter.    

Truth is bitter

England 3-0 Australia.

Champions.

winners
situational winners
I already congratulated them

England 3-0 Australia.

Champions.

Half of Eng...all of autralia and better part of the rest of the cricketing world will see the "situational winner syndrome"...so Duty my friend.....repeating yoursefl doesn't help much

KP_fan wrote:

Hoggy_Bear wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

Hoggy_Bear wrote:So what you're saying KP_Fan, is that England have been good enough to totally dominate one test and to use good situations/luck to their advantage in 2 others, while Australia haven't been good enough to do either?
Is that it?

Toss is toss...you eitehr win it or not........Eng got lucky with toss 3 times
and when they were not lucky with toss...rain bailed them

England haven't been bailed out by the rain. There's no way anyone can know what would have happened if it hadn't rained at Manchester and they were well on the way to drawing this match rain or not.

Yeah..Yeah...we believe you:idea: 

So assumptions are all you've got then?
I assume England would have drawn at both Manchester and the Oval, even if it hadn't rained. Can you disprove that? No
Fact is that England have won the toss 3 times and won all three. Australia have won the toss twice and, as of this moment in time, haven't won either.

KP_fan wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Bless KP_Fan, so bitter.    

Truth is bitter

England 3-0 Australia.

Champions.

winners
situational winners
I already congratulated them

England 3-0 Australia.

Champions.

Half of Eng...all of autralia and better part of the rest of the cricketing world will see the "situational winner syndrome"...so Duty my friend.....repeating yoursefl  doesn't help much

I'll just wait until winter then, when England muller Australia again. I'll say a repeat of the 3-1 from 2010/11 will be the score this time around.

And then it'll be interesting to see what your excuses are again.

Or will you mysteriously disappear, like during the India-England series?  

So assumptions are all you've got then?
I assume England would have drawn at both Manchester and the Oval, even if it hadn't rained. Can you disprove that? No
Fact is that England have won the toss 3 times and won all three. Australia have won the toss twice and, as of this moment in time, haven't won either.

Yeah Hoggy....you made your point once and I believed you

England overtake India, enough said.

Hmm. I understand KPFs reputation, and more went into this series win than mere luck, but there are some warning signs that England need to heed before heading to Australia.

skyeman wrote:England overtake India, enough said.

I can't undertsand how and when they dropped below India  
for they were No. 1 and lost it to SA narowly...and India had dropped to No.5

and since Eng have not lost a single test...and won every one of 3 series they played....with a good series margin...so how did they drop below India  

something flawed with the rankings

KP_fan wrote:

skyeman wrote:England overtake India, enough said.

I can't undertsand how and when they dropped below India  
for they were No. 1 and lost it to SA narowly...and India had dropped to No.5

and since Eng have not lost a single test...and won every one of 3 series they played....with a good series margin...so how did they drop below India  

something flawed with the rankings

OMG I agree with you KP fan.

I'll just wait until winter then, when England muller Australia again. I'll say a repeat of the 3-1 from 2010/11 will be the score this time around.

And then it'll be interesting to see what your excuses are again.

Or will you mysteriously disappear, like during the India-England series?

I am fair and congratulated Eng every time and as much as is due including on this thread.
i will appear to congratulate them if they win in Aus.
they can...but they have to change their defensive/ negative attitude...bring fast bowlers for their bowling...get a proper opener....and give KP the license to bat freely like the a game changer...instead of asking him to be a Trott copy cat

KP_fan wrote:

I'll just wait until winter then, when England muller Australia again. I'll say a repeat of the 3-1 from 2010/11 will be the score this time around.

And then it'll be interesting to see what your excuses are again.

Or will you mysteriously disappear, like during the India-England series?

I am fair and congratulated Eng every time and as much as is due including on this thread.
i will appear to congratulate them if they win in Aus.
they can...but they have to change their defensive/ negative  attitude...bring fast bowlers for their bowling...get a proper opener....and give KP the license to bat freely like the a game changer...instead of asking him to be a Trott copy cat

Just rubbish KP fan, i have seen Sachin score 11 from 80 odd balls, as the match dictates.

skyeman wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

I'll just wait until winter then, when England muller Australia again. I'll say a repeat of the 3-1 from 2010/11 will be the score this time around.

And then it'll be interesting to see what your excuses are again.

Or will you mysteriously disappear, like during the India-England series?

I am fair and congratulated Eng every time and as much as is due including on this thread.
i will appear to congratulate them if they win in Aus.
they can...but they have to change their defensive/ negative  attitude...bring fast bowlers for their bowling...get a proper opener....and give KP the license to bat freely like the a game changer...instead of asking him to be a Trott copy cat

Just rubbish KP fan, i have seen Sachin score 11 from 80 odd balls, as the match dictates.

there is NEVER a situatin that justifies a sachin or a KP to score 11 from 80 balls...just plain negative/ defeatist cricket...
i remember he did something like that against Pak and we choked to a last session defeat......such negative batting by dominant players is NEVER justified

But it is at times, why do you think they do it?

3-0, including a 300+ run win, achieved by playing 'negative' cricket.

Fine by me.

I think we all got that the first 700 times Duty

I don't think KP_fan did.

skyeman wrote:But it is at times, why do you think they do it?

In Tendulkar's case...cobwebs appearing in his brain under the "perceptions" of responsibility.
 
In KP's case.......instructions from a much lesser talented Flower...who thinks that that negative way is the only way in such situations.

Considering I've seen people moan at him for repeating the same comment all the time and act like it solves the argument entirely, tad hypocritical to argue the same way

The end result is, Aus go into the next Ashes having not won in nine Tests. They will be feeling the pressure from the press and punters alike. If they lose at Brisbane! Then the pressure will be multiplied, so a job well done at the Oval.

skyeman wrote:The end result is, Aus go into the next Ashes having not won in nine Tests. They will be feeling the pressure from the press and punters alike. If they lose at Brisbane! Then the pressure will be multiplied, so a job well done at the Oval.

in my starting post...I already mentioned.....who goes forward with the momentum...in any-one's call  

here are some opinions
 
Ashes 2013: England Oval Test performance deflating - Agnew
England have simply not been at the races in this fifth Test, and that is bitterly disappointing.

This has not felt like a celebration of an Ashes series won. Instead, we have been watching a side that looks significantly off the pace.

This England team does not appear to respond well to being on the back foot. They get a little stroppy, a little "we're taking our ball home with us".

They say that they are a win-at-all-costs outfit. They interpret playing hard as playing to give nothing away, so when they are behind in the match, they are happy to go ultra-defensive and attempt to slow the game right down.

The performance only gives more ammunition to those Australians who say that the current 3-0 score does not accurately reflect the gap between these two teams.

Australia may indeed have lost these Ashes. But they have sorted out their issues nicely as it comes to an end.

Shane Watson is now inked in at three. Steve Smith is inked in at five. Both have been allowed here to make significant centuries that will put them in far better shape for the forthcoming series down under.



...Agnew on BBC

Not so much momentum, Which you could argue are one and the same. But the pressure from the press,former players, fans. To me there is a difference.

Not having won in nine Tests, will play on their minds. So again, a job well done.

Who will be the happier and more confident side going into the series in Oz KP?
Australia, who haven't won in 9 tests and have just lost 0-3 to the opponents who they'll be facing, or England?

All semantics KP fan.

Tests!! killing cricket is ridiculous, they will be played long after we have gone. No matter the style. And agree with others, pure hyperbole from former players, press and fans alike.

KPF, the OP could have been much better. Seemed you just wanted to have a bit of fun through some keyboard battles.
I won't say much about the toss and pitches. Toss could be significant in test matches, it was, is and will be the case in most conditions. Rain has certainly helped England a great deal more than it did Australia. The DRS mess initially helped England a bit more, and then Australia had their fair share of moments.
Now beyond all that, Englandhave been the better team in the series. Besides not getting outplayed in 4 of the 5 tests, Australia failed to show up on big moments throughout the series. Even at OT, they had a good chance on day 4 to enforce the follow-on, particularly as Pietersen was out late in the previous day. Instead of capitalizing on a struggling Matt Prior and the English lower order, Australia let Broad smash away the follow-on in 15 minutes and then let Swann and Anderson cut down the lead significantly.
And in this last test, despite England settling for a draw at the end of the 2nd day itself, the bowlers couldn't sustain any real pressure to capitalize on England's negativity.
England have a few issues to address though. The top order hasn't had a good series at all, and even Pietersen had a below his high standards series where he remained strictly adequate. Only Ian Bell had an outstanding series with the bat. With Matt Prior also struggling, the inconsistencies of the top order became all the more troubling for England. Joe Root is taking longer than expected to get going as an opener, and there are certain technical issues he needs to address before the return series. If the technical issues are not substantial as he has a solid technical foundation, it seems the mental side of his game needs to be worked on a lot more. He used to be such a positive batsman, always full of intent without doing anything rash. That Root has gone somewhere, and young Joe needs to find and summon him back right away.
Jonny Bairstow has remained far too inconsistent, and unlike Root, there seem to be significant technical issues with his game. I hope England would try James Taylor, Ben Stokes or Chris Woakes and whosoever among them are chosen, they would get a fair run. The latter 2 would give them quality 5th bowling options, though their bowling may not be developed or sharp enough to be part of a 4 man unit at this stage of their career.
And Steven Finn and Chris Tremlett should be going to Australia if fit, and I think one of them, preferably Finn, should be their first choice 3rd seamer with Tim Bresnan being the reserve who can step in if there is a case of form loss or injury. Simon Kerrigan is not ready for test cricket as of now. He might overcome his horrible debut one day and take over from Graeme Swann after he gets done at the highest level, but that will certainly take time. Monty Panesar should be England's 2nd spinner, and the team management should provide him every support in overcoming his mental issues.

As for Australia, their batting does remain rather fragile and too dependent on Clarke. The one real positive is Steven Smith. It was ridiculous that the selectors didn't choose him for the original Ashes squad after his performances in India Eventually sense prevailed and Smith has done reasonably well in the series, and earned for himself a fair run in that number 5 position. Hopefully he gives a bit of time to work on his ones promising bowling, so that he could remain a handy parttime bowling option at least. Would have liked James Faulkner getting a more meaningful opportunity with the bat. I have a good feel about the lad. I am fairly sure he could offer more as an overall package than the likes of Phillip Hughes and Uzman Khawaja do and that he should be given a fair run in the side, and I think he should bat ahead of the wicketkeeper batsman, Haddin or Wade.
Austraqlia have showed that they are capable of competing against this England team. Home conditions should prove a lot more friendly for them, and captain Clarke is a run machine at home. Their hit the deck seamers should also find home conditions more helpful. The Australians would be doing whatever they can with the conditions so that Graeme Swann wouldn't have too many advantages to create a lot of trouble for them.
So England can and should get a lot more fight from Australia in the return series.

GSC wrote:Hmm. 3-0 certainly flatters England, who haven't really played that well

However Australia have probably played about as well as they could expect bar a few more Clarke specials, couple of their batsmen come off occasionally. They have a top class seam attack but no wicket taking spinner.

Australia will probably feel happier than when they arrived about their chances in the return series. Would've won at OT without rain intervention, and came very close at TB.

England will know they have quite a bit more in their locker, but they'll have to bring it out in Australia, with Swann unlikely to be given the conditions to be a factor.

Well said. Nice to see some people maintain perspective amidst all this rather childish banter.

GSC wrote:The main difference to me, when England were on top they knew how to press home their advantage.

Yep, very similar to the 2009 Ashes, even if the series scoreline may suggest otherwise. There isn't much to separate the two teams in terms of individual stats, just like in 2009. 2010/11 was a complete domination and this doesn't feel like that even though the series scoreline reads even better. I do think though and this is a view not shared by many, that England will actually be a better side in Australia. The comparatively flatter pitches may bring out the real class in the England batting (I'm looking at Cook, in particular as he's someone who has a far better record away from home) whereas its hard to see Australia do any better with the bat than what they've done in this series. You could say Clarke will possibly do better at home, as his career record would seem to suggest but my feeling is that England have got the measure of him and have done so since the 10/11 series. I expect England to win a far more comfortable series in Australia although strangely enough, I do think Aus will win 1 test but overall, I expect England dominate the rest of the series, unlike this series where they have only really dominated at Lord's even though Australia haven't won a test.
I hope that makes sense, even if it may sound a tad contradictory on first reading.

Aye in a sense England can only really get better, their batsmen aside from Bell were forgettable and the seam attack fired on occasion.

Australia have played just about as well as they can. They need the likes of Smith to kick on and have a really good series