England hasn't been clean sweeped in living memory in Australia...and this was the reigning champs against 'dads army'.

Nowhere near the worst - we've sent some shockers over that I can remember. But this lot has probably played just as badly, you're right.

No - I'd say that the 1986/7 England side was weaker than this one.

Agree the 86/87 mob were dire.

This lot lacked positive leadership and a firm belief in their abilities.
I'd still back them all over again, bar the obvious warts who have since been removed!

94 side was very poor.

I guess 98 and 02 aren't as bad as we think as caddick was very good in 02 and gough bowled with real heart in 98 england could have done with eithr on this tour.

The fact that this is the second ranked team in the world makes it worse though for the fans to take.

They expected 5-0 in 02 but not now.

quote:

Originally posted by RedDuster:
Agree the 86/87 mob were dire.

Could Dilley, DeFreitas or Small have got into the current England team? Gower would have, Gatt would have, Broad might have, Botham by that time was weaker than the current Fred. Combining the sides:

Strauss
Broad
Gower
KP
Gatt (c)
Fred
Jack Richards (w)
Dilley
Harmi
Monty
Hoggy

Hmm, 5 of one and 6 of the other.....

If Harmison makes the combined side, 1986 must have been direr than dire. He shouldn't be in the current side!

And yet his career stats are better than Small's and DeFreitas's.

Maybe you want another spinner.

Whatever the reasons, not one of our players has put in a match-winning performance.
Ok, KP and Colly should have done, but we even managed to botch that one up.
Fact is, if we lose in Sydney it will be the worst tour in living memory.
Appalling.

Aye, it's looking like 1989 revisited ... then, too, England (the favoured side pre-series) capitulated weakly before an unexpected juggernaut.

Hardly unexpected this time, Lardy. We knew full well that you'd added Hussey and Clark to fix the weaker links from the previous series and won all but one of your subsequent tests.
Which just makes our preparation even more gallingly incompetent.

This isn't a bad team.

They've been badly led and managed and their morale is as non-existent as LJH's compassion, but there are very good players there.
It's sickening that they've been thrown to the wolves with the selection policies of the first three tests.

Having said that, I think Aus would probably have still won even if the best team from this squad was playing from the start, with Strauss as captain. You cannot underestimate our boys' determination to put right the perceived wrong of 2005.

England have missed Trescothick BADLY.

It's a load of ifs and buts, of course.
I think that last year's side with Read and Panesar might have exposed chinks in the armour and certainly would have given you a harder time, but enough to overcome the Aussies' psychotic determination and home advantage? Tall order, for sure.

quote:

Originally posted by lardbucket:
England have missed Trescothick BADLY.

I watched a lot of the last english summer and he wa in very bad form, worse than strauss and cook for sure.

if he played that may have kept collingwood out of team as as well robbing england of one of it's few good moments.

quote:

Originally posted by please:

quote:

Originally posted by lardbucket:
England have missed Trescothick BADLY.

I watched a lot of the last english summer and he wa in very bad form, worse than strauss and cook for sure.

if he played that may have kept collingwood out of team as as well robbing england of one of it's few good moments.

Quite.

Every player suddenly looks like the best thing since sliced bread when they're not playing - Simon Jones has made a career out of it.

Trescothick was in horrible touch all summer and has a pretty ordinary record against Australia - never made a hundred against them.

It's a bit of a leap of faith to imagine that he would've made a huge difference.

Poor old Tres has been mentally shot for a year now. I think he should take a year off the international game.

quote:

Originally posted by Mister Robby:
Poor old Tres has been mentally shot for a year now. I think he should take a year off the international game.

I don't think he'll actually get a say in the matter now.

It's sad, but England have to move on.

Talent wise this team is streets ahead of the teams that went to AUS in the 1990s...it's just that this Aussie team is a lot better than they were in the early to mid 90s plus the fact that ENG severely lack experience.

I think a case could be made that the aussie teams in the 90's(talented as they were) did just enough to win the series and then went to sleep.

Mark Taylor prided his team on winning the big games and the big points but they never seemed to have that hunger to destroy england like this current team has.

Ashes Team of 2005 (re-worked)

Strauss
Trescothick
Vaughan*
Cook
Peitersen
Flintoff
GoJo
Si Jones
Harmison
Hoggard
Panesar

quote:

Originally posted by DJ_Smerk:
Ashes Team of 2005 (re-worked)

Strauss
Trescothick
Vaughan*
Cook
Peitersen
Flintoff
GoJo
Si Jones
Harmison
Hoggard
Panesar

With Panesars Energy, giving Harmison more positive energy to accompany Flintoffs, and with Simon Jones reversing the ball and Hoggard swinging it in Australia would have been in serious trouble on all surfaces.

On the batting side, Cook would have bolstered the batting in place of Bell who looked shakey from the get go, he would have been able to way anchor in the upper middle order (after the top order had fallen), while Flintoff and Peitersen swing merrily with Jones contributing lightly here and there.

As has been intimated earlier, this is far from the least talented team to tour Aus but they have probably played the worst cricket. Bowlers who were half injured or didn't turn up and the lack of an old head in the top 5, like Thorpe was in the past, are a couple of the reasons.

quote:

Originally posted by NB:
and the lack of an old head in the top 5, like Thorpe was in the past, are a couple of the reasons.

PS Well Thorpe was a bad example relating to Aus, as he missed the last tour, but the sort of role he played before his retirement, is what I meant. England missed Vaughan and Trescothick for more than just their batting.