True this, the 90s Ausie team was an absolute machine that gave no quarter whatsoever. They never stopped, they were utterly relentless. Foot on throat from the first ball and squeeze till the opponent gave up and died. The sporting killer instinct that I’d love to see in Liverpool. They wouldn’t stop and pass it round if they were 3 up, they’d go for the jugular for every second of the match.
That was the amazing thing about 2005, they celebrated a draw. There was finally a chink in the armour.
Not in favour of 4 day tests. But either having an extra reserve day to ensure that 4 days are played OR bowling more overs in a day. Fail to see why teams cant bowl upwards of 100 overs in a day. They did bowl 105 overs in a day before the demand of big tv to fit in breaks every over got in the middle
The downfall started from 2001 onwards. The india Australia series where they lost a test match after enforcing a follow on. Every Aussie captain since then has taken to not enforcing a follow on in a similar position. That’s the first step.
Then Waugh goes out and ponting comes in , one who isn’t in the same class as Waugh in captaincy.
They still had a great team in 2005-6 and beyond but the cracks began to show.
And also because the standard of the Australian cricket at that time was so far ahead of the rest of the countries. The Australian second team then would probably be the 2nd or the 3rd best team in the world…
I saw both. I rate both of them highly , possibly the ashes more.
There was some immense batting in the second innings by laxman and dravid to go a whole day without losing a wicket against the Aussie bowling attack. Also the background of the series being India about to lose , dravid facing calls for being dropped after a lacklustre series before. Australia on a record winning spree made for a great series turning cricket match. And possibly, that was the start of the recovery for Indian cricket (after the match fixing scandal which got azharuddin banned). This series was defined by one match
But ashes 2005 was a proper slugfest of two teams going at it without giving an inch.
Absolutely @Sithbare. I remember the overnight report of the second Indian test after first innings when it looked certain Australia would sweep them away, Laxman really became VVS in Australia after that.
But the ebb and flow of the ashes session to session in 2005 was just incomparable.
I would argue Punter was a better captain than Steve Waugh. Pretty good captaincy stats.
Waugh had Warney and McGrath to lean on at their best and loved playing the so called tough guy with the ruthless streak. Improved his stats. I never liked Waugh so maybe I’m biased. He was the most selfish batsman who played for the not outs to keep the average at 50. Fair play though he could dig in when needed. His brother was a much better cricketer and Punter a better captain.
I also wasn’t the greatest admirer of S.Waugh either, only because I was a huge Mark Waugh fan and as a kid I always saw it as a competition between the two (my brother preferred S.Waugh!).
And I think Ponting was a better captain as well. The late 90’s cricket team were dominating, but it was also at a time when England were pretty crap. How would S.Waugh handle that 2005 England team? Maybe he would have wanted to play out for a draw when facing the prospect of a defeat. Btw, how is that a criticism? Of course you will celebrate a draw when you looks certain to face a defeat!
Interesting that now Root is also asking for longer days etc because it suits his team in this situation. Its getting a little embarrassing now asking for the game to be changed drastically because you were on the receiving end for once of bad weather.
Taylor was a more innovative captain and Ponting had a better winning percentage but it was Waugh and his tough personality that gave the Aussie team their ruthlessness and toughness. He is also quite underrated as a batsman - he tended to make the runs when it mattered rather than stat padding ala a Ponting or Warner. A Waugh led team wasn’t as much fun but it possibly also wouldn’t have lost the 05 ashes.
It really isn’t. How is adding extra potential playing time a drastic change? It’s a minor improvement of the type all sports need to make from time to time. It’s a good idea regardless of any individual game. Surely we want to see as much cricket as possible and to see results as often as possible.
Nope. Ponting captaincy is pretty lacking at times. And it’s not all about the wins/losses. Clarke didn’t have too good a win loss record but his captaincy was better than ponting.
Don’t prance around it: Was there anyone in England who wanted this change 2 months ago? Its like saying Australia weren’t bitter every time weather resulted in a draw in a game we needed to win.
Following a national cricket team is 95% emotion, 4% rational thought and 1% empathy. Absolutely no-one gives a shit when the shoe is on the other foot.
I think that should be the order of the day for everyone then. As @mattyhurst said earlier, the talk since 2017 by the ECB has been to push 4 day tests, and now there is an uproar that there should be a spare day on the back of a single match that didn’t go England’s way. Way too much emotion in this. We’ve got some quarters suggesting scrapping the idea of retaining the Ashes for god’s sake.
From the outside it looks like a few headless chooks have been let loose in the backyard. Never has the term ‘whinging poms’ been more applicable. Not the English should care a jot but Australian media are openly mocking the conversations that are being had since this match finished. At times justifiably.
And I’ll state again no-one gets enjoyment out of being 2-1 up in a series only due to the weather. Just as no-one enjoys being the completely dominant team and the match being drawn due to the weather. I’ve felt literally nothing for this 4th test because in all honesty its just a null match -the series was 2-1 before the match. Its 2-1 after it. If we win the series I will be over the moon though.
I also don’t want to see draws removed from test cricket - sometimes great fight takes place around holding out for a draw, for rain. That’s part of the game and has been for as long as I can remember.
As for Root’s particular argument, it seems a peculiar one. On day 4 and 5 it rained well into the night. Whether the play was extended to play later into the evening, it wouldn’t have made any difference. Add to that, say the rain did stop, and knowing that this will be heavy overcast conditions very late in the day, do we just completely remove the rules about bad light from the rule book? Do we switch over to a pink ball mid-match and play under lights? Are we here to simply throw out the rule book over a single match?
The arguments at least need to be consistent and make sense, and preferably they would also be decisions made rationally without emotion more than 3 days after a highly charged partially-series-deciding (because retaining really means nothing) match. And that will be the test. If you are all arguing for these changes in 2-3 months, I’ll know you mean it.
Ehh, I’m not emotional about cricket like you clearly are. I just take enjoyment out of watching it. Great if England win, doesn’t ruin my day if they don’t.
My opinion isn’t going to change. I’d rather a game is settled on the pitch as much as is possible. I didn’t realise that was a controversial one.