• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

How many runs will Alastair Cook score in the 2013/14 Ashes?

How many runs will Alastair Cook score in the 2013/14 Ashes?


  • Total voters
    29
  • Poll closed .

Son Of Coco

Well-known member
Coco, what is your explanation for Clarke's poor series (187 aside it was a bad series for him)? Did England bowl well to him? Was he a bit out of form?

I would say a bit of both just as is the case with Cook. If you Aussies claim to have found Cook's achilles heel, we can say that we've found Clarke's because he could only get a century on a road and Australia are supposed to be preparing bouncy wickets. God help Michael Clarke...
Clarke was obviously woefully out of form and got himself out more than the bowlers got him out. Plans are overrated. He's due a 50+ average in this series, because that's how cricket works.
 

Son Of Coco

Well-known member
I've always thought of Australia being a very hard place to bowl in general. For years the McGrath/Warne factor glossed over this for you guys - meanwhile whilst the rest of the world had to suffer (mostly in vain).

In 10/11, I think what we saw was quite simply mediocre bowlers toiling in unhelpful conditions (compounded by a batting lineup unable to concentrate for more than 10 minutes) So welcome to reality, Australia!!

The world we've lived in for decades!
Some of the same bowlers are playing now...well, at least one. There's no excuse for consistently bowling both sides of the wicket and too short all the time. The batsmen, by playing so well, make it hard. But we managed to bowl some fairly ordinary stuff in England the year before that too. So I don't think it being difficult to bowl in Australia had a lot to do with it.
 

GuyFromLancs

Well-known member
Some of the same bowlers are playing now...well, at least one. There's no excuse for consistently bowling both sides of the wicket and too short all the time. The batsmen, by playing so well, make it hard. But we managed to bowl some fairly ordinary stuff in England the year before that too. So I don't think it being difficult to bowl in Australia had a lot to do with it.
Hilf bolwed well in 2009, but I knew this success wouldn't be replicated in 10/11. Siddle (IMO) also looks more dangerous in England. Although I accept he toils well everywhere.

Now call me out by all means, but Harris' style also (again IMHO) makes him look like a bowler more suited to England than Australia. But I'm sure there will be a flurry of people to correct me on this, and tell me that at home he should be renamed Wasim Ambrose
 

Son Of Coco

Well-known member
Harris will be fine here. Bowled well against England in Australia last time. And Siddle is simply a better bowler now, he pitches it up more and stays in the right areas more often. Ponting said in his book that in 2010/11 the bowler's inconsistency meant plans to Cook and Trott weren't followed. Apparently it got to the point where they forewent team meetings before the Perth test because inevitably they did the opposite to what was discussed.
 

uvelocity

Well-known member
thats a load of ****. you only had to look at pontings fields in brisbane to see the bowlers had no hope.
 

Tangles

Well-known member
Punters trying to make all the loses someone else's problem. And Clarke is the non team player?
 

Son Of Coco

Well-known member
I'd be very surprised if bowling short and all over the place was a part of the team plan. I wasn't there though, so I don't know.
 

GuyFromLancs

Well-known member
I'd be very surprised if bowling short and all over the place was a part of the team plan. I wasn't there though, so I don't know.
I'd be surprised if the plan included Ricky averaging 16 with the bat too. So he has little room to moan about that series
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
The plan probably didn't include a rocket throw from the other end of the wicket to run him out either, but then again that was the series before
 

Dan

Global Moderator
The plan probably wasn't to lose three games by an innings. I think all members of the team can take part of the blame for the plan not being followed, tbh.
 

uvelocity

Well-known member
ponting set deep **** fields and clearly told them to bowl short. i will hear nothing otherwise. else he is as thick as two bricks putting fields to **** bowling
 

Son Of Coco

Well-known member
I'd be surprised if the plan included Ricky averaging 16 with the bat too. So he has little room to moan about that series
Spot on comment about the bowling in that series. Well done :sleep:

Just like the bowler's can't do much about the batsman's efforts when they're batting, there's not a lot the batsmen can do in the field when the bowler's are serving up a steaming pile of ****.

If the bowlers weren't following the plans set for the batsmen, and he's the captain, then he has everything to moan about. The very fact it took McDermott to come back and suggest maybe they pitch it up doesn't say a hell of a lot for the thinking (or lack thereof) that went into efforts in 2010. You don't have to know a hell of a lot about the game to watch Cook and Trott bat and think short on middle and off isn't the best place to bowl to them...but that's what we did. Consistently. Match after match.

Of course you could argue they were in such good form they made our bowlers look worse than they actually were. There seemed to be a marked difference in the areas we bowled then and in the last series in England though. I have my doubts we have the bowlers in the 1st test capable of maintaining similar pressure...but we'll see.
 
Last edited:
Top