Print

[tim2000s]

I think you meant to say they couldn't tie up either end. At times the dreadful batting was evenly matched by the dreadful bowling

I was trying to be a little more than re magnanimous, however as you mention it, yes, why bother trying to pound Lyon out of the attack when the seamers are going at more than four an over...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Number4]

Lyon was probably our best bowler

[smokem]

I do wonder what might have happened had Siddle been selected. Throughout this series, for the most part, Australia have struggled to tie an end up. They've almost been too aggressive. Would Siddle have made it that much harder to score runs?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He should have been selected for the fourth test without a doubt. Going into Trent Bridge with Hazelwood and Starc out of form, it was optimistic to think that both could pull it together for the game. Keeping both was a poor selection decision in my opinion.

[Alvaro]

Starc bowled like a demon on Friday! Those Yorkers were awesome.

[Number4]

Let's be seriously honest here though England didn't win the Ashes on the back of their batting. It was their bowling that did the damage. England only had one batsman and that was Root.

Against a team who puts up a better fight than Australia have they will need more than one batsman and I think that showed when they played New Zealand

[joeljonno]

He should have been selected for the fourth test without a doubt. Going into Trent Bridge with Hazelwood and Starc out of form, it was optimistic to think that both could pull it together for the game. Keeping both was a poor selection decision in my opinion.

Starc 18 wickets.
Hazlewood 16 wickets.
Lyon 12 wickets.
Johnson 11 wickets.

Harsh to say Starc and Hazlewood were the ones out of form.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[procricket]

For me it was a bit of both who had the better bowlers won the game and who's batsman could play the moving ball better.

Make no mistake neither side are classic sides but the battle was won in my eyes by Joe Root. 

Let's look at facts the Aussie had one guy all summer who could tough it out in Chris Rodgers who until Broad found his weak area was the glue.

Are we surprised really Warner a biffer and gives a chance when it moving Smith was always going to struggle when it did move and looked like a muppet bar the time it didn't move.
Clarke was always shot and doesn't have a good record in the UK. Coped with Watson who did what he does Australia never had a platform.

England in all fairness bar Root where no better Lyth is badly lacking the quality I feel and the rest Had average to poor series bar Root who took the game away at times singlehandly with his counter attacking punch.

Bowling on both sides was on top Starc for me was most disappointing for only really one session did we see the quality he has. Johnson is a one trick pony, Hazelwood will need to learn but I feel he will become a great bowler if he learns he can't force wickets and as for Lyon well he bowled really well coped with the fact England thought he was a pub bowler but he had the last laugh. Neville is a good keeper and looks like he could bat in the Watling mould.

Overall although a brilliant ashes win not a patch on the New Zealand series.

[Number4]

As I said in the Joe Root thread Dave Root has only scored 6 runs more than Rogers but in a winning side it seems more spectacular

[procricket]

Rogers is a class act shame he so old brilliant player

[Number4]

He is a true test batsman I think

[Seniorplayer]

As I said in the Joe Root thread Dave Root has only scored 6 runs more than Rogers but in a winning side it seems more spectacular

Yes you are correct Rogers 437 runs from 8 innings ave 62
                             Joe 443  from 7 innings ave 73 imagine what his average would be if England had batted 1st on that Lords           
                                     Pitch.

[Number4]

Yes you are correct Rogers 385 runs from 8 innings ave 48.
                             Joe 443 from 7 innings ave 73.

Have another look. Rogers 437 runs at an average of 62

[Number4]

And 1 of those innings he retired on 49

[Seniorplayer]

Have another look. Rogers 437 runs at an average of 62

Yes  also Didn't include the not out

[joeljonno]

Root got more runs in less innings.

He also stood out more than Rogers because he has taken most outfield catches and bowled too, so always seems to be in the game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk