Australia's darkest day... Changes must be made for Sydney!

[jnr8]

Hey guys, I just found this fantastic piece by an Australian journalist... http://penandpaperblog.org/2010/12/26/australias-darkest-day-marsh-khawaja-copeland-and-okeefe-must-debut-in-sydney/#comment-296 Thoughts?

[achilles]

Excellent article. Unfortunately, the non-performing high profilers might get one more test.

[Nirvanam]

Hey guys, I just found this fantastic piece by an Australian journalist... http://penandpaperblog.org/2010/12/26/australias-darkest-day-marsh-khawaja-copeland-and-okeefe-must-debut-in-sydney/#comment-296 Thoughts?

Fair write-up if you can get over the over-hyping of the Ashes being some kinda holy grail of cricket. I think it makes sense for Aus to throw in their youngsters in the deep end and find out if they can swim. They are bound to find 1 or 2 decent fellas if they throw in about 10 in the rest of the season. Pawning, saddens me to say, seems like he dunn deserve a place in the starting eleven in spite of this being an eleven that can challenge NZ and Zim for the worst Test line-up today.

[jnr8]

Nirvanam, do you have any understanding of the history of cricket? The Ashes is the holy grail and quite frankly, Test Cricket and cricket in general wouldn't exist if it wasn't for The Ashes. Spud.

[Nirvanam]

Nirvanam' date=' do you have [i']any understanding of the history of cricket? The Ashes is the holy grail and quite frankly, Test Cricket and cricket in general wouldn't exist if it wasn't for The Ashes. Spud.

Jnr8, do you have any sense of broader perspective in life? The Ashes maybe the holy grail for the Aussies and the English but it is in not the holy grail as far as Test cricket as a whole is concerned. Up until the first few minnows in cricket evolved into regular Test playing countries, Eng and Aus were the default Test countries. Now, just coz until 1950s there were no other decent Test playing countries and the fact that 2 countries had a rich tradition built around their cricket, it does not become the holy grail of Test cricket itself. Here's a serious argument for you to consider. When was the last time the Ashes was truly the Test series for a world cricket fan to watch? This is my understanding of the History of the game...please correct me if I am wrong and refrain from just hurling abuses or talking in the air (Mods who wrote to me I am observing how consistent you are with this thing, right now). 50s-60s Ashes were the pinnacle. Late 60s Saffers gained predominance over the Poms and Cons. So Ashes necessarily could not have been the pinnacle of Test cricket during that time. Then, from 71 to 76 again Ashes was definitely one of the better Test series if not the pinnacle itself. From around 1977 to 1995, any series involving the number 2 team and West Indies would have been closer to being the holy grail than the Ashes. From 1995 to 2000, there was no the holy grail...many match-ups were enticing like Aus-SA, Aus-Ind, SA-Pak, Ind-Pak, etc. Between 2001 and 2008, the holy grail was the Border Gavaskar trophy with an honorable mention for the 2005 Ashes. Since December 2006 the Ashes has reverted back to not being the holy grail of Test cricket world-wide. It continues to be...but only for Aussie and Pommies maybe...not for cricket in general. Now, dude, why would you think a contest between #4 and #5 be the holy grail of Test cricket for the world cricket community?

[thevortex]

Nirvanam - forget the numbers and the rankings and what not. Do you for a moment believe that the quality of cricket seen in even this Ashes is equal to the quality of cricket seen in the current India-SA series? I will not argue against the Border Gavaskar series. They have their own charm. The Ashes have their own charm. As far as quality of cricket goes, I would rate the English-Aussie contest a tad better.

[Sachin=GOD]

Nirvanam' date=' do you have [i']any understanding of the history of cricket? The Ashes is the holy grail and quite frankly, Test Cricket and cricket in general wouldn't exist if it wasn't for The Ashes. Spud.

the Ashes used to be the Holy Grail.

[Nirvanam]

Nirvanam - forget the numbers and the rankings and what not. Do you for a moment believe that the quality of cricket seen in even this Ashes is equal to the quality of cricket seen in the current India-SA series? I will not argue against the Border Gavaskar series. They have their own charm. The Ashes have their own charm. As far as quality of cricket goes, I would rate the English-Aussie contest a tad better.

Either you did not understand my point or you aren't bothered to anyway

[thevortex]

Either you did not understand my point or you aren't bothered to anyway

If you believe that the Ashes showcases the quality of cricket of teams ranked No. 4 and 5 and the India-SA contest shows up the No. 1 and 2 ranked teams in the world, then I will say nothing more.

[Nirvanam]

If you believe that the Ashes showcases the quality of cricket of teams ranked No. 4 and 5 and the India-SA contest shows up the No. 1 and 2 ranked teams in the world' date=' then I will say nothing more.[/quote']Hence my observation about your misunderstanding my point...you have confirmed it, with this post of yours.

[jnr8]

Firstly, how can I respect anything written by a racist pig who uses terms such as; Saffers, Poms & Cons You obviously come from an uneducated background to even think for a moment that language like that in this day and age is acceptable. Pull you head in and watch your mouth. Secondly, your argument is flawed. The Ashes is, and always will be, the most watch series around the globe, by viewers external to those who's countries are playing. In other words, there are far more people watching The Ashes from outside of England and Australia, than there are watching India/South Africa from outside of those respective countries. The Ashes has the richest history in almost any sporting contest around the World, let alone cricket. No teams have faced-off as many times as England and Australia have, there is simply no bigger rivalry. As for your claims of Australia and England being "default" Test nations, ifit wasn't for Australia and England playing each other, no other nation would even be playing Test cricket. The tqo countries created it, developed it and spread it around the globe... To lable them as default nations is once again, extremley disrespectful and horribly wrong. As for your claim of The Ashes never being a spectacle, did you not watch the 2005 or 2009 series? They've been labelled, BY CRICKETING EXPERTS FROM ALL COUNTRIES, as the greatest two series ever, in particular 2005. To call it now worthy of being watch again highlights your lack of cricket knowledge. As for your calls on the 50s-60s being the pinnacle of all Ashes contests, what do you based these wild claims on? How old are you? Did you watch them? Unless you're 70+ years old, those claims can not be made as you weren't alive when it happened. Nirvanam, you my friend have to get your blinkers off and appreciate the true history of Test cricket... Not just since India started playing Test cricket. The Ashes have a history of 133 years, think about that before you mouth off. And, enough with the racist slurrs, absolutely disgusting.

[yoda]

Saffers and Poms are racist terms? http://forum.sportal.com.au/yaf_postsm2207160_Official-Match-Thread-Boxing-Day-Test-Australia-vs-England-Melbourne-Cricket-Ground.aspx http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=663677 http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php/37484-Guild-Wars-questions.../page47

[jnr8]

Of course they are... And posting links to various other forum discussions doesn't change that fact. Pom; a British (usually English) immigrant. Some claim it derives from "Prisoner of Mother England" or "Prisoner of Her Majesty", but it probably derives from pomegranate, rhyming slang for "immigrant". It is often used irreverently and is usually considered offensive. As for the terms Saffer, Saffa or other variations, you surely have no brains if you think that's acceptable!!

[yoda]

Of course they are... And posting links to various other forum discussions doesn't change that fact. Pom; a British (usually English) immigrant. Some claim it derives from "Prisoner of Mother England" or "Prisoner of Her Majesty", but it probably derives from pomegranate, rhyming slang for "immigrant". It is often used irreverently and is usually considered offensive. As for the terms Saffer, Saffa or other variations, you surely have no brains if you think that's acceptable!!

Go easy Mr. Large Brain. It was just a question as it is a commonly used phrase not just on this board, rather elsewhere also. May be you need to visit all those boards and bark at all of them. LOL!

[EnterTheVoid]

Nirvanam' date=' do you have [i']any understanding of the history of cricket? The Ashes is the holy grail and quite frankly, Test Cricket and cricket in general wouldn't exist if it wasn't for The Ashes. Spud.

Sorry but I beg to differ. The game is more important than any series.

[thevortex]

Hence my observation about your misunderstanding my point...you have confirmed it' date=' with this post of yours.[/quote'] Really? This is a quote from your post up above - "Now, dude, why would you think a contest between #4 and #5 be the holy grail of Test cricket for the world cricket community?" I will leave you to figure out who is wrong and where.