Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Cricket] Fourth Ashes Test - England v Australia - Trent Bridge



knocky1

Well-known member
Jan 20, 2010
12,978
For England supporters, this is a time for unalloyed joy and celebration. England have soundly beaten Australia and won the Ashes. Simple as.

Victory over the old enemy is English cricket's syringe of heroin: an instant feel-good; a balm for all troubles; gratification in and of itself. One of Lou Reed's Perfect Days.

The first test series I saw on TV was in 1975, we lost but I was hooked. I remember sneaking my radio to bed for the Centenary Test in 1977 as Derek Randall tried his best to win the match against Lillee and Tommo in their prime.

From the late 1970s to the mid-1980s, England routinely beat Australia.

But then began a period of Antipodean dominance so long, so utter, and so unanswerable, that precious few believed the urn would ever return to these shores. Because the Ashes define us, emotionally, the brutal Australian period of dominance corroded my soul and hacked our self-esteem to shreds.

This is why, even though England have now won five of the last seven series, any Ashes victory still creates that moreish, irresistible, sugar-rush of redemption and bliss.

Especially so, since the savage humiliation of 2013-14 remains so raw in the memory.
This series England won, against the apparent odds. The team played with more fThe Aussie skipper has struggled with the bat recently, averaging just 32 since the turn of the year, and having posted a top score of 38 in his last 11 Ashes innings.reedom and self-expression than for years.

Stuart Broad is in the form of his life. Joe Root is now a genuine world-class batting superstar.

Ben Stokes and Moeen Ali point to an exciting future.

But now comes the self pitying bit.

I cannot find it in myself to derive one iota's pleasure from England regaining the Ashes.

And here's why.

For the last forty years, man and boy, I gave the England cricket team everything I had.

During my cricket fandom period, come thick or thin, and it was mainly thin, I was a loyal England supporter.

I was emotionally invested, committed, and patriotic.

I identified my own fortunes with those of the England team.

Victory brought joy, defeat sorrow. Tense, important, and closely-fought matches reduced me to a nervous wreck.

In the days before the internet, I followed entire sessions test matches on Ceefax.

Throughout my years as a supporter, I backed our players without question. I defended the team when they lost.

During the dark years of the 1980s and 1990s, no defeat - no matter how supine - turned me against England.

Neither results nor the quality of performance were relevant. I gave unconditional love.

I greatly admired Andrew Strauss, both as player and captain. I admired Alastair Cook during the 2010-11 Ashes, and the 2012 India tour.

What did we get in return as England fans?

When push came to shove, how were those years of unflinching loyalty repaid?

In February 2014 the ECB took a long, slow look at us, and then – quite deliberately – thrown a bucket of cold piss in our faces.

When the ECB responded to reasonable questions and objections over the Pietersen affair by abusing and belittling their own supporters, by telling lies, and by avoiding interviews but leaking innuendo through their friends in the press, they made an important statement.

The England side was their own personal property. It belonged to them, and no one else.

No England follower, in the ECB's view, possessed any equity in the team. They take your money, and that's as far as it goes, you can rot in hell as far as Giles Clarke and co are concerned.

When the ECB decided they would pick the England team on the basis of their corporate politics and personal grudges, rather than cricketing merit, they killed stone dead the concept of a national England cricket team.

From that point onwards, the eleven players on the field would represent the ECB, not England.

I find it impossible to invest my emotional energy into a corporate entity. I may as well support Vodafone or American Express.

When the ECB moved heaven and earth to construct the fantasy portrayal of Alastair Cook as a saintly, selfless, national saviour - when their own evidence suggested he willfully helped destroy Kevin Pietersen's career, for no apparent reason beyond his own benefit - they made another factor clear.

Nothing about the England team - what they said, what they did, or how they operated - could ever again be taken at face value.

Black was white and white was black. The England XI on the field was a sham.

Because Cook had colluded and connived with his bosses' skulduggery, he became their place-man, an on-field role of ECB representative which he gladly accepted.

And yet the team was built around him, and justified by his supposed virtues.

The side became his vehicle and vanity project, further eroding any remaining claim to a representative mandate.

How much could I enjoy supporting a side like that? How fervently could I cheer them on?

How could I identify myself with England, when England wanted nothing to do with me?

What had been the point of forty years of anguish and heart-break on their behalf?

And why should I endure any more, for their sake?

The ECB have had eighteen months to reflect on their misconduct and selfishness.

Despite tsunamis of criticism, they have never provided a word of recognition or regret.

The substitution of Colin Graves for Giles Clarke has made not one jot of difference.

They have no interest in olive branches. They don't think they've done anything wrong.

They enjoy being the 'inside' and they want you and me to remain firmly outside.

The entire concept of supporting a sports team relies on the principle of joint endeavour.

Otherwise you're spending your spare time cheering on millionaire strangers.

The ECB severed public from team and are happy to keep it that way.

I can't get excited about a party I've not been invited to.

I can't take pride in the achievements of a project which didn't want me involved.

This isn't another KP apologist post, there are far more important problems in English cricket than one player.

The Sky deal, the Big Three, administrative myopia and self-interest will all cause English and world cricket far more damage than team selection.

This has never been about one player. It will never will be. It's about belonging.

It's about ownership. English's cricket's moral corruption and destructive conduct - whether at home or abroad, however expressed - are part of the same problem.

Because they believe cricket is theirs, and theirs only, they do what the hell they like, and couldn't care less about the consequences.

I don't want it to be this way. I want my England back. I want your England back. But we didn't start this fire. And we cannot put it out alone.

My biggest fear is that it's not just England for which my love has disappeared, but the Albion too.

Something is missing, and I suspect that others feel the same way about the club and the game we all grew up with as I do.

Hmm. I can see your point. Then again I do plan my life to go to these games. Good value days out.
 




Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
50,207
Goldstone
But now comes the self pitying bit.
Jesus Pres, are you alright?

Interesting points that you raised/cut and pasted. I don't see how that can be linked to the Albion though. I don't feel that it's someone else's play thing, and that we're not relevant.
 


dangull

Well-known member
Feb 24, 2013
5,113
England have done well on home conditions again, and to beat any Aussie side in the biggest test series in the world should be celebrated rightly. I still think KP would be a bigger asset than a number of the England batsmen playing, but know I am in the minority with this view. The fact that England have never won a cricket 50 over world cup compared to the Aussies and other nations is something I hope will change in the near future.

We did invent the game after all !
 


Mo Gosfield

Well-known member
Aug 11, 2010
6,292
FFS, we were massive underdogs at the start of the series, but have performed brilliantly and won the Ashes. Several young players have broken through, several wizened pros have rolled back the years and upped their game.

The fielding has been brilliant. The team spirit has been fantastic. The attacking approach has transformed the team. Cook has captained brilliantly.

The Aussies were expected to be unbeatable, but have not performed as they hoped - and this has largely been down to how England have approached the game. There have been far worse teams representing Australia in the past, but they have been outplayed, out-thought and outfought.

Incredible that you can respond to what has been an uplifting and brilliantly unexpected sequence of performances with such negativity.


1) England have performed well and up to their ability and Australia have underperformed. Luck plays a part and England had their fair share. Root is now the main man and I have been impressed with Stokes. The bowlers have performed better than their Aussie counterparts.
2) The fielding has been brilliant at times but thats what you expect at Test level. There have still been too many dropped catches by both sides to categorize the whole series as ' brilliant '
3) I didn't say that this was the worst Aussie team in their history. I said I thought it was probably their worst Test performance ( big difference )
I stand by what I said. It has been an exciting series, played by two average sides. Neither of them can travel. England can't play on hard fast bouncy wickets and the Aussies can't play the moving ball in our conditions. Fewer and fewer Aussies play regularly in England now, preferring one-day bashes around the world.
Cook is now playing up to form again and lets hope it lasts. ( His losses of confidence have been too regular before ) We have no established opening partner and big problems in the top five. Bell is completely out of touch and nearing the end of his career. Since the loss of KP and Trott, there has been a fragility in our top order, which now relies almost entirely on Root ( who is top class ). Buttler hasn't got the technique or concentration to get serious runs lower down the order and quick fire 40's from Ali aren't always going to rescue us.
The seam department is in good shape but we have a terrible problem with spin. We have no class spinner in the country and trips to India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka are going to be a massive problem.
The batting at times, from both sides, in this series has been appalling. Chasing wide stuff from the word go. No discretion, no judgement, just slashing at anything outside off stump. Run after run flying down to third man, with no effort to stem the tide. Players caught in mid-shot time and time again. Some of the poorest technique and judgement I have seen in a very long time.
The bowlers have done their job and done it well. Putting it in the danger area and letting the batsmen commit suicide.
Hats off to England for a tremendous win against the odds but I am a purist and the lack of quality shown by both sides has been alarming. Finishing games in two and a bit days, says more for sub-standard cricket than top-quality cricket.
 






Mo Gosfield

Well-known member
Aug 11, 2010
6,292
All falling apart here now, they are starting to blame the cricket WAGS now, very amusing.

I remember a certain overseas player with Sussex, who was not out overnight v Australia at Hove. ( 25ish ) He had no sleep that night, being entertained by a young lady. The next day he made 141.
You can blame the WAGS all you like but they are not out in the middle giving their wickets away.
 


knocky1

Well-known member
Jan 20, 2010
12,978
England have done well on home conditions again, and to beat any Aussie side in the biggest test series in the world should be celebrated rightly. I still think KP would be a bigger asset than a number of the England batsmen playing, but know I am in the minority with this view. The fact that England have never won a cricket 50 over world cup compared to the Aussies and other nations is something I hope will change in the near future.

We did invent the game after all !

The inaugural 50 over match was in Kerala, India in 1951. Around 11 years later English Counties followed up with a 65 over contest. Soon to become 60 over.
 


Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
50,207
Goldstone
I still think KP would be a bigger asset than a number of the England batsmen playing, but know I am in the minority with this view.
He's definitely good enough, but team spirit is important and he didn't help. It's not like Cantona wasn't good enough for the French side in 98, but they went and won the WC without him.
We did invent the game after all !
We invented everything.

Luck plays a part and England had their fair share.
Luck can play a part, but I don't think it has. We've had no more than the Aussies. I don't particularly disagree with the rest of what you said.
 




hans kraay fan club

The voice of reason.
Helpful Moderator
Mar 16, 2005
61,379
Chandlers Ford
Luck can play a part, but I don't think it has. We've had no more than the Aussies. I don't particularly disagree with the rest of what you said.

England have outplayed them. Had Australia not won the toss at Lords, we could well have been looking at 5-0.

The one very important stroke of luck England did get, was the injury to Ryan Harris. Hard to see how he could have made THAT much difference though. The Aussies big problem has not been their bowling.
 


Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
50,207
Goldstone
England have outplayed them. Had Australia not won the toss at Lords, we could well have been looking at 5-0.
Well, possibly 4-0, let's not get ahead of ourselves :)

The one very important stroke of luck England did get, was the injury to Ryan Harris.
Yes, but Australia got lucky when England's best bowler missed Trent Bridge - how did that work out? Harris could have made a difference, but missing one player isn't a great excuse.
 


nwgull

Well-known member
Jul 25, 2003
13,825
Manchester
Well, possibly 4-0, let's not get ahead of ourselves :)

Yes, but Australia got lucky when England's best bowler missed Trent Bridge - how did that work out? Harris could have made a difference, but missing one player isn't a great excuse.

I agree. England have had no more luck than Australia. It's been 2-2 on the toss over the 4 games, hasn't it? Anything that happens once that call is made is down to judgement of the captain and skill of the team.
 




Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here