Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Why we lost the Ashes

Why did we lose?


  • Total voters
    62
Michael Holding made some interesting comments and told of a similar tour the West Indies made in '74 or so. The problem then was the attitude of some of the players and the law was laid down for them - WI went on to rule the cricket world. Maybe there's been a loss of team ethos with us, Simon Hattenstone wrote in the Guardian

Next, Christmaslunchgate, when five of the team didn't turn up. The coach, Duncan Fletcher, blathered that attendance wasn't compulsory so no need to worry. Ian Bell explained further in one of the seemingly compulsory newspaper columns that the players produce: "In the case of Sajid Mahmood and Monty Panesar, the fact [is] that they do not celebrate Christmas."

Far be it for me to come over all Norman Tebbit, but Christmas lunch on tour is not about religion or culture, it's about solidarity. I am Jewish, but if I didn't turn up to the Guardian's Christmas bash, citing religious reasons, there'd be hell to pay. As Australia's coach and psychological terroriser in chief John Buchanan would put it, it's about being a team player. Buchanan has done a brilliant job of destabilising the England team, as in fact has Fletcher.
 
Picking Freddie as captain was a stupid move, similar to when Beckham was made captain of the England footie team. You don't want the star of the show as captain, you want the methodical, level headed plodder who can handle a bit of pressure, i.e. Strauss.
 
souljacker said:
Picking Freddie as captain was a stupid move, similar to when Beckham was made captain of the England footie team. You don't want the star of the show as captain, you want the methodical, level headed plodder who can handle a bit of pressure, i.e. Strauss.

As proved by Brearley, to some extent.
 
Not re-signing Colley as bowling coach was a huge fuck up for sure.

Bell, although shakey, has been one of our better batsman and shown signs that he's maturing into a handy player. Not great, but much improved. 4 50s is decent enough ave 33 isn't disasterous.

Pietersen, Cook and Strauss have been the real problems this tour - if your openers don't got runs at some point your pretty much fucked.
 
How has Pietersen had problems? Along with Collingwood he had the only decent average on the tour!

I like Pietersen bashing with the best of them, but despite a few dodgy shots at the wrong time, he's one of only two English batsmen to put up a fight down under this time round.

Matt
 
Because batting where he does, he needed to stick around a lot longer. Not so much scoring runs, but just staying out at the crease and frustrating the bowlers.
 
The reasons are the same as those relating to the England football team.

THEY HAVE NO BOTTLE.

Once there is any kind of real pressure, certain national teams get more resolute and more focused (Australia, Germany, etc..) The English crumble.

Last years Ashes was a fluke. Sure, England played well, but there were times when they nearly lost matches they should have won easily. That Ashes series could easily have been 3-1 to Australia.

It's funny how the English always look externally when things go wrong. All the other great teams in any sport look at themselves to find ways of improving.

When the going gets tough, the English go shopping.

Wankers.
 
Not attending the Christmas lunch because they're not Christian is a pathetic excuse.

Aussies were awesome. We were dreadful. That simple.
 
Duncan Fletcher has no idea.

Winning the Ashes saved his job for him (and apparently made it safe).

However, bad choices have been made continuously since. Strauss should have been made captain, not Flintoff, that was stupid. 18 months ago, it looked like we'd given up the idiotic selection of players out of form because of who they were. This tour, it was back (the Ashley Giles selection, what a complete fucking joke). There appeared to be little support for the team, and the coaches didn't seem to be offer any alternatives when things weren't going right.

Once the morale was down, there was no chance it was going to be picked up because the coaching staff have no clues and Flintoff was a green captain without the experience to motivate his players.
 
Iam said:
Duncan Fletcher has no idea.

Winning the Ashes saved his job for him (and apparently made it safe).

However, bad choices have been made continuously since. Strauss should have been made captain, not Flintoff, that was stupid. 18 months ago, it looked like we'd given up the idiotic selection of players out of form because of who they were. This tour, it was back (the Ashley Giles selection, what a complete fucking joke). There appeared to be little support for the team, and the coaches didn't seem to be offer any alternatives when things weren't going right.

Once the morale was down, there was no chance it was going to be picked up because the coaching staff have no clues and Flintoff was a green captain without the experience to motivate his players.

All just excuses. Fletcher was being hailed as a visonary and a great coach last summer.

They are not good enough. They don't have the right temprament ..if they did, they'd only have lost this series 2-1 instead of 5-0.
 
Boycott was right on the radio this morning.

No disgrace to lose to such a great team.

No excuse for losing in such an awful manner on perfectly good cricket pitches. A half-decent team should have been able at least to draw a couple of matches. The least bad defeat was one of 6 wickets. It wasn't just 5-0, it was 4 and a half thrashings to nil.
 
bowling coach

captaincy (should have stayed with Strauss, Freddie is too like beefy in bad ways as well as good, it would have taken the pressure off so he had a chance of finding some real form and Strauss wouldn't have made some of the poor decisions like batting first at Melbourne, under cloud, with a greasy green top and an outfield slower than my dead grannie FFS)

selection (monty and read from the start, not so sure about the anderson/mahmood issue myself)

S Jones was a massive factor in winning the Ashes in 05

but the key to it has to be the lack of Vaughan as the psychological catalyst that pulled the team together, we're always going to have personality issues and insecurities but IMO he overcame them and gave them self belief, building on what Nasser had achieved by force of will
 
I tell you one thing, having followed a lot of the aftermath: those Aussies really wanted it, didn't they?
 
Jonathan Agnew has also come down with a team ethos argument

Discipline has to be restored. For a start, this includes reminding the players that being on tour is a job - and a very well paid one at that.
If they do not want to be away from home, that’s fine: don’t come. The pandering to the players union, the PCA, has to stop.
Tours must be structured properly, with the right balance between preparation, hard work and down time.
There has to be a spell at the start of a tour when the team builds its spirit and character without the distraction of the families.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/tms/2007/01/huge_wakeup_call_for_england.shtml
 
ICB said:
Boycs is always right about cricket, it's one of the things that makes him so annoying :D

Yeah, right he is. They used to mock him mercilessly in the West Indies - one of the funniest things I've ever seen is the video montage they put after the Windies bowled England out for 48 runs or so, taking great glee from Boycott's pre-match keyworthy pitch inspection in which he claimed it was a great wicket on which England was sure to rank up runs. The Windies commentators were pissing themselves...
 
zed said:
All just excuses. Fletcher was being hailed as a visonary and a great coach last summer.

Not by me, he wasn't.

They are not good enough. They don't have the right temprament ..if they did, they'd only have lost this series 2-1 instead of 5-0.

That may also be part of it, but it's certainly not ALL of it (far too simplistic... unless you actually believe the players' names materialize on the teamsheet by magick), otherwise we'd never have come close to a win in any case, nevermind won a series. But of course, if that *is* the case, there's no solution and no point playing...

:)
 
There is no point in playing, unless ...

1) The players can be trained in how to not choke. There have been many sportsmen who have learned to do this ...so not impossible.

2) The English supporters stop having any expectations and accept that they are not good enough to consistently be classed as amongst the best in the world ..as in football, rugby, etc..
 
zed said:
There is no point in playing, unless ...

1) The players can be trained in how to not choke. There have been many sportsmen who have learned to do this ...so not impossible.
Yes, John Curry the skater had to learn how not to choke. He always fell on his arse in big competitions until he went away and studied techniques to hold your bottle. Martial arts are good for this, but you would have thought at least some of them would have this quality innately.
 
I feel that the team (and hangers on / coaches etc) went into the series with the wrong mind set.

Starting with the warm up game, not bothering that they were beaten, the same old lame excuses "we're traditionally slow to get started"

It was a warm up game, they should have destroyed them, as the Aussies destroyed England.

They are paid too much money!! This really is a pet hate of mine.

If they are playing for the honour of representing the country that should be payment enough. BUT to get paid and then play like they have, really this is beyond a joke.

There was no passion or at least to me there seemed to be precious little. It seems that it's the same old usual suspects turning up almost as if by right.

Resting on their (luckily won last Ashes series) laurels.

There really is no excuse for the worst defeat in the Ashes since, what, 1921, a time when Britain (and for that matter) Australia, had been bled dry by the first world war.

This team should hang their collective heads in shame. Unfortunately, unlike the Aussies (or most other teams come to that) who would come back fighting after such a defeat, I have a feeling that the usual excuses will be once again rolled out.

Young team . . . . still being formed . . . . lacking top international experience . . . . blah blah blah.

PLAY TO WIN or don't bother playing. Simple as that.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

DISBAND THE ENGLAND CRICKET TEAM FOR TEN YEARS!

God help Team GB in the Olympics in a few years. I'd bring back hanging for anything less than a medal.

There are SOME lessons that can be learnt from good ol' Saddam after all :mad: :mad:
 
littlebabyjesus said:
Yes, John Curry the skater had to learn how not to choke. He always fell on his arse in big competitions until he went away and studied techniques to hold your bottle. Martial arts are good for this, but you would have thought at least some of them would have this quality innately.

A lot of golfers have too.

Some people do have this ability innately ...but athletes in team sports don't seem to pay it much attention. I don't know for sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if young people going through the Australian sports academy systems are taught this on some level.

It can't just be a cultural thing. Can it? There has to be a reason why the Germans never lose at penalties and can win when playing badly and the Aussies always do well at their national sports like Rugby, Swimming and Cricket.
 
It just comes down to one thing in the end.

Preparation.

The Germans do well on pens because they think about them before they happen. Always be fore-thought - it is wisdom at least as old as Miyamoto Musashi in early feudal Japan.
 
zed said:
It can't just be a cultural thing. Can it? There has to be a reason why the Germans never lose at penalties and can win when playing badly and the Aussies always do well at their national sports like Rugby, Swimming and Cricket.

Its worth remembering that twenty years ago the Aussies were rubbish at cricket, and the West Indies were the example everyone held up of a great side. Once Marshall, Ambrose and Walsh retired they rather quickly became less good.
 
Yeah ...but what did they do that made them great?

My point is that it is possible to learn greatness ..or at least what it takes to be great. Only England (and the rest of the UK for that matter) refuses to learn these lessons.

Is it an inherent arrogance?
 
Back
Top Bottom