The End Of Australian Dominance?

[tech.007]

their is no dominant force in cricket.....today its Australia tomorrow its India or Kenya you cant say....

 

[evertonfan]

Their dominance may be wavering but one thing is for sure, we aren't going to be winning the Ashes as easily as people think this summer. It's harsh but we are essentially a team full of bottlers and it'd gonna be another tough series against the Aussies in 2009.

A lot of England fans seem to be forgetting that we aren't exactly all that great these days either. India and South Africa beat us as well.

 

[venom2011]

The thing is, Johnson is a very unique bowler that many batsman aren't used to facing as he creates uncertainty with his angle and extreme pace - This is what gets him wickets.

Apart from Kevin Pietersen, the English batting is incredibly weak and I think that every English right-hander will struggle to deal with Johnson. Especially in England where Johnson might get the ball to move back in and he'll be near unplayable. I think the main key will be if Alastair Cook & Andrew Strauss can get runs at the top of the order and that will determine whether or not England will be competitive or if they'll get blown out of the water.

I'm predicting a very successful tour for MJ.

Sure that's what's getting him wickets right now, but once batting lineups develop solid plans to counteract his style, I can't see him being too successful. It's almost impossible due to his consistantly erratic bowling. Same thing happened with Harmison, Malinga, Fidel Edwards etc.

Ill predict a successful tour for Aus, but maybe not for MJ just yet,. But who knows, maybe he will still have that surprise value against the Poms.

 

[manee]

I love how people like this guy try accuse me of providing biased stats. Everyone does it but yet I'm the one that gets accused of it and whenever I provide the statistics that you, King Pietersen, manee or sohum use for a different arguement then they get discarded. Typical.

I make a distinct effort to keep away from replying to your posts. Moreover, not once have I been asked to justify a particular filter and not responded with sound reasoning.

 

[m_vaughan]

Their dominance may be wavering but one thing is for sure, we aren't going to be winning the Ashes as easily as people think this summer. It's harsh but we are essentially a team full of bottlers and it'd gonna be another tough series against the Aussies in 2009.

A lot of England fans seem to be forgetting that we aren't exactly all that great these days either. India and South Africa beat us as well.

India and South Africa beat Australia aswell. And England performed better against India than Australia.

 

[Themer]

India and South Africa beat Australia aswell. And England performed better against India than Australia.

England probably played better than Australia did/are against South Africa and they beat S.A 4-0 in the ODIs

 

[aussie_ben91]

England probably played better than Australia did/are against South Africa and they beat S.A 4-0 in the ODIs

South Africa dominated England in England whilst Australia dominated South Africa in both Tests until some Smith, Steyn & Duminy brilliance.

 

[smssia0112]

England probably played better than Australia did/are against South Africa and they beat S.A 4-0 in the ODIs

We haven't played the ODIs yet.

 

[mdoggie]

South Africa dominated England in England whilst Australia dominated South Africa in both Tests until some Smith, Steyn & Duminy brilliance.

You can hardly say that Australia dominate South Africa when they were down for 5 without 200 on the board. Any team that needs to get most of their runs with the tail order is not dominating.

 

[aussie_ben91]

You can hardly say that Australia dominate South Africa when they were down for 5 without 200 on the board. Any team that needs to get most of their runs with the tail order is not dominating.

What about when you a have the opposition trailing by over 200 runs on first innings and they only have 3 wickets left in hand? Is this not a dominant position?

 

[Big Man]

Sure is.

Its been a great decade or so but no team stays on top forever.

 

[mdoggie]

What about when you a have the opposition trailing by over 200 runs on first innings and they only have 3 wickets left in hand? Is this not a dominant position?

How many times did the Australian tale score heavily?
SO I am guessing 3 down for 20 runs is dominant or 166 for 5 is dominant. You count one innings but Their were plenty of times where South Africa were dominating but every time the Australian need their tale to pull them out of the gutters.

 

[smssia0112]

That's not the point, the point is we had dominant/winning positions in both tests but failed to convert them. Through those players that performed, we can build a team that is good enough to get back to the top.

 

[Big Man]

That's not the point, the point is we had dominant/winning positions in both tests but failed to convert them.

So true, that was very disheartening.

Through those players that performed, we can build a team that is good enough to get back to the top.

And we will.

This isnt the West Indies, this is Australia, we will become #1 again.

 

[mdoggie]

That's not the point, the point is we had dominant/winning positions in both tests but failed to convert them. Through those players that performed, we can build a team that is good enough to get back to the top.

But so did South Africa, they get down to the tail cheaply and them when they are in command, they let the tail prosper and get Australia's total from terrible to good. Imagine is South Africa took the wickets of the tail which are generally easier for 50 runs, Australia would have struggled to get 300 runs.

But the fact is that the difference between Australia and the rest of the world was that when it counts, they shined through but if that is gone, then a team will struggle to win.