| 
Posts and words
Loading ...After 100`s of cricket series in vastly different times, conditions, countries etc it is a massive statement to say this or that series is the greatest of all time and in the end it has to be an subjective decision. However for me what makes sport (and not just cricket) great is tension and surprise because we can argue about quality until the cows come home. When liverpool won the champions leaue a few months ago it was not as if Liverpool were the greatest side of all time but what a game!
Something similar applies here, it´s the circumstances that make this the greatest series ever (for me anyway).
12 Circumstances that make this series the greatest:
1. England have not won for so long.
2. Undoubtably some of the greatest players in History Warne, Mcgrath, Gillchrist, Ponting.
3. Flintoff.
4. The way it´s being played, look at the run rate for god´s sake.
5. Three very, very close finishes including one of the closest in history.
6. Australia recent record makes them one of the best teams ever´
7. It all boils down to the very last game of the series.
8. The difference between the sides is so small.
9. The contrast between the old great side and the new great side.
10. The relationship between the teams.
11. The crowd.
12. England is desperate for some sport to challenge football.
I´ve been watching test cricket for 25 years and this is without doubt the best I´ve seen. Maybe some old timer can remember something better but I´m with you Will on this one.
Review: England v Australia, Trent Bridge
By Will 5 years ago, at the end of August Add your comment below
I’ve received a few (8) emails and 28 comments from people disagreeing with my statement that this is the greatest series ever, so this review is a vague attempt to quantify it…but it’s more, simply, a review of another brilliant Test. Few can deny that the game we saw was brilliant theatre and a spectacular sporting occasion.
At the start of the fourth day, England were without their trump card, Simon Jones. Remarkably, given his outstanding improvement this series, he wasn’t missed too greatly; a wonderful testament to a collective team effort, showing this England side never need rely on one bowler, or one player. In Duncan Fletcher’s terms, Matthew Hoggard “came to the party” and, praised by Andrew Flintoff, he bowled his best spell of the series. Earlier this month, I wrote a piece for Cricinfo on his importance to the England side, but I was worried it [the article] would soon lose its relevance. Thankfully, Hoggard did once again “sweep the shop floor,” picking up two vital wickets. Two, you ask? Two? Not a massive haul, granted, but they were the two most important. Michael Clarke had looked settled, and batted so well in the morning session. Hoggard got his away-swing working perfectly and, pitching it up he drew Clarke into a wishy-washy poke to grab his wicket just before lunch. It was a vital breakthrough.
Clarke and Katich had arguably set the scene for an Adam Gilchrist batting bonanza. Indeed, Gilchrist’s intent was obvious, smashing two fours in quick succession. But Hoggard returned to trap him leg-before. Suddenly, Australia’s hard work by Katich and Clarke in the morning session had been thrown away. Their lead was futile, a handful of runs; but for another aggressive and brilliant innings by Shane Warne (how well has he batted this tour??), the target Australia eventually set would have been far lower than 129.
One hundred and twenty nine runs to lead the series 2-1. I was very confident it would be a walk in the park, but my colleage at Cricinfo was having kittens. He was an absolute nervous wreck from the start. As I said, 129 wasn’t enough for Australia “barring a Shane Warne special,” and while England did reach their target, it was not without considerable alarm. Shane Warne, again, threatened to end England’s chances of winning the Ashes, with a performance to win over a thousand more fans. He is an utter legend and we’re so bloody lucky to watch him perform. The situation was just perfect for him – backs against the wall, defending a target of 129, he took Trescothick, Strauss and Vaughan’s wickets to leave England 57 for 3. It became 57 for 4 as Bell, unwisely, tried to hook Brett Lee. When Andrew Flintoff and Kevin Pietersen were dismissed, my nerves suddenly went into overdrive. “Damn you, Will, and your cocksureness!” I told myself.
Geraint Jones followed, with a really dreadful smite off Shane Warne and suddenly, incredibly, England were 116 for 7. 13 to win. Three wickets left. Ashley Giles and Matthew Hoggard at the crease. How dare you give us another national coronary, England?! Giles and Hoggard saw England home in what Richie Benaud described as one the most tense matches he had ever come across.
I suppose, arguably, England should never have let Australia in with a chance. But Warne is Warne, and if this series has showed us anything, it is the power of a chastened champion.
At Old Trafford, I wrote the tide was turning. In fact, I wrote the tide had turned. England failed to win that (“England lack the killer blow” and all). And so we’ve seen it develop in this Test match, as England really demonstrated their total lack of fear of Australia. As a supporter who has for his entire life only ever witnessed Australia’s dominance over the Urn, it is a proud, special moment. Once again, England trounced Australia for 99% of this Test; brilliant team performance, and one individual again proving his might. Andrew Flintoff, future King, Prime Minister and anything else he wishes for! Already approaching legendary status before this game, his hundred (first against Australia in his first series against them) was a thing of beauty. It almost appeared pedestrian in its pace, yet came from just 132 balls and was the key to England reaching 477 (winning the toss and batting first). His muted celebrations said much about the man. There was no wild hoorays and badge-kissing; simply a raised bat, a standing ovation, and a smile which said “Ta – but this is just the start of things.”
I’ll do a blog and paper round-up later.
Tags: adam-gilchrist, andrew-flintoff, ashley-giles, australia, england, matthew-hoggard, Michael-Clarke, shane-warne, simon-jones, test-cricket, the-ashes, trent-bridge |
12 Responses to “Review: England v Australia, Trent Bridge”
August 29th, 2005 at 2.55 pm
August 29th, 2005 at 3.05 pm
Chris, thanks for those 12 points, perhaps something I should’ve done. I’ve noticed my blog change this series – I haven’t had the time to blog as voraciously since getting this job with Cricinfo, yet the comments from people like you Chris have increased day after day! Including offering insightful thoughts, so…many thanks.
And I agree with all your points. It is indeed subjective, but I’m quite certain my late Father, who was born in 1942 and followed Cricket passionately until he was 57, would have found this the greatest series in all the ones he watched. I reckon Richie Benaud, who appears to have been around since cricket’s inception, will agree it’s the best, if only in terms of pure drama.
August 29th, 2005 at 3.48 pm
Yesterday I blogged on this issue a bit myself. I would add a few more factors to Chris’s points: the age and intensity of the historic rivalry, the monkeys-on-backs (or demons to expel, if you prefer) of both the England team and a number of individuals, the dramatic theme of youth vs. experience, the emergence of a new (and probably over-hyped) weapon of choice (reverse swing), and the physical pummeling that some of the players (especially Langer and Lee) have endured at the crease.
The most compelling part, though, is probably the underdog story. To quote Homer Simpson: “It’s like David and Goliath, only this time David won!”
August 29th, 2005 at 3.53 pm
Interesting perspective, Alan, re David and Goliath. I’d agree, except England is no longer David! (And Australia no longer Goliath). Bangladesh’s victory over Australia was a victory over Goliath, though 
August 29th, 2005 at 3.59 pm
The fact is that nobody predicted back in June/July that The Ashes were going to unfold in this way. Can anybody find an links for articles going back a couple of months making predictions so we all all have a good laugh.
August 29th, 2005 at 4.17 pm
August 29th, 2005 at 5.53 pm
Fair enough about Bangladesh being the real David vs. Goliath story, but that seems to have been a fluke. I would not say that England is Goliath yet, though. If a few more breaks had gone Australia’s way, England might be down 2-1 or even 3-0. Part of what makes this a compelling contest is that they still have to prove that they’re the big dog, and it all comes down to the last match.
BTW, I left out a couple other factors in the greatness of this series:
1) The global audience. Here I am in California. This Saturday I met an Indian immigrant at a local cricket match here who told me, unsolicited, that his friends were giving him a hard time because he was rooting for the Aussies. I even read that in India people were switching the channel away from their own team’s ODI matches to watch the Ashes. While this is a reflection or a result of the greatness of the series, it also feeds into it.
I do have to say, though, that when I was in Paris during the Edgbaston test and watched a few sessions at a British pub, I missed the best of Flintoff’s batting because when the cricket fans had gone away for the lunch break, the bartender decided that a football match between Sheffield and Leicester was more important than the cricket, and no one could persuade him to change the channel back. Not everyone gets it, but I guess that means there’s more greatness to go around for those of us who do.
2) Related to the global audience, perhaps, there’s Henry Blofeld. Perhaps Richie Benaud fans will disagree, but I think the series would not be the same without Blofeld’s distinctive voice, and his knack for interrupting a moment of high tension to point out that a floppy pigeon has landed near the crease.
I think about how so much of the legend of Muhammed Ali arose from the distinctive, borderline-obnoxious commentary by the late Howard Cosell. So, too, is cricket enhanced by the voice of Henry Blofeld.
August 30th, 2005 at 3.50 am
these were comments when I started an ashes poll, and these wre the results:
ho hum. the poll is over, and a measly 95.2% of the votes say Australia will take that litte urn thing all over again (well, the Crystal cup, at any rate).
Australia wins 3-1 52.4%
Australia wins 3-2 19.0%
Australia wins 3-0 19.0%
England wins 4.8%
(total) Australia wins 95.2%
What tangled webs….
August 30th, 2005 at 5.46 am
Another commentator that enhanced his sport was Murray Walker for Formula One.
August 30th, 2005 at 9.58 am
I am Indian based in India passionate about cricket and our Indian team. I had followed the 2001 Ind-Aus series very well and then it was hailed as the best series ever. But, for sheer sustained drama, this is much better than that. When I have both the Indian match in Zimbabwe & the Ashes test on TV at the same time, I prefer watching the Ashes. That maybe, sums it up all.
August 31st, 2005 at 3.14 am
India v Zimbabwe will give the Ashes a good run for its money as best series ever.
August 31st, 2005 at 5.25 pm
Sorry to join the party late, but I think that this is the best series I have seen, ‘for the sheer sustained drama’ as someone mentioned. As for greatest all-time series, I think the 1960-61 Aus-WI series has to be a strong contender, as is the India-Aus 2001 series, which I think has been pushed back by this series. I have officially agreed to as much (shamelessly peddles blog post 
) – http://blockhole.blogspot.com/2005/08/it-just-keeps-getting-better.html
And btw, what about the Bodyline series?
Cheers
Comments
« England scrape home and lead the series 2-1 against Australia | Main | The things I, and they, said… »
