So we won the cricket series...

Cressers

So what?!

How long before the Jedwood of politics try to bathe in the reflected glory? How long before the sucessful sportsmen get honours for being sucessful sportsmen? How long before the BBC (aka News Lite) shut up about it?

Already i have spotted a hastily-run-up-the-flag-pole cross of St George (made in China) hanging limply in the rain.

inkyfingers

Why are you so bothered? If there is somethinbg on the TV or radio that you don't like you have the right to switch it off.

Personally I think it's a great achievement and have thoroughly enjoyed this ashes series. No it's not as important as a war or an election, but wouldn't the world be a dull place without a few good news stories?

I do agree with your point about politicians using sport for their own means though, that annoys me as well.

Pross

^ +1

Stewie Griffin

Cressers wrote:

So what?!

How long before the Jedwood of politics try to bathe in the reflected glory? How long before the sucessful sportsmen get honours for being sucessful sportsmen? How long before the BBC (aka News Lite) shut up about it?

Already i have spotted a hastily-run-up-the-flag-pole cross of St George (made in China) hanging limply in the rain.

If you mean Cameron and Clegg then after we won the T20 World Cup Cameron apparently asked the team who Collin Wood was. What a Berkshire Hunt.

verylonglegs

If you don't understand it's significance then you probably aren't a cricket fan anyway...so therefore why the hell start a thread moaning about it? :roll:

amaferanga

Great Britain won the cricket? I didn't think we had a Great Britain team. Oh hang on a minute....

Only 1 country in 4 gives a sh@t

inkyfingers

Stewie Griffin wrote:

Cressers wrote:

So what?!

How long before the Jedwood of politics try to bathe in the reflected glory? How long before the sucessful sportsmen get honours for being sucessful sportsmen? How long before the BBC (aka News Lite) shut up about it?

Already i have spotted a hastily-run-up-the-flag-pole cross of St George (made in China) hanging limply in the rain.

If you mean Cameron and Clegg then after we won the T20 World Cup Cameron apparently asked the team who Collin Wood was. What a Berkshire Hunt.

Thats a classic! I know a bloke called Colin Wood, nice guy but a terrible cricketer.

This series has been really enjoyable and the bonus is that my Mrs has been getting into it as well so shouldn't have such a battle over the remote next time I want to watch some cricket!

rick_chasey

inkyfingers wrote:

Stewie Griffin wrote:

Cressers wrote:

So what?!

How long before the Jedwood of politics try to bathe in the reflected glory? How long before the sucessful sportsmen get honours for being sucessful sportsmen? How long before the BBC (aka News Lite) shut up about it?

Already i have spotted a hastily-run-up-the-flag-pole cross of St George (made in China) hanging limply in the rain.

If you mean Cameron and Clegg then after we won the T20 World Cup Cameron apparently asked the team who Collin Wood was. What a Berkshire Hunt.

Thats a classic! I know a bloke called Colin Wood, nice guy but a terrible cricketer.

This series has been really enjoyable and the bonus is that my Mrs has been getting into it as well so shouldn't have such a battle over the remote next time I want to watch some cricket!

Shame she's got into the wrong sport.

shm_uk

The test series was a good performance by many of the England players, with some great individual achievements (although arguably against a relatively poor Australian team compared to recent years).

However, seeing as the Ashes has been contested every few years since 1882 or something, and will probably keep on going for ever and flippin' ever, it becomes a bit irrelevant who wins each time...(much like the premiership. why can't they play once, decide who's best, and leave it at that, rather than going through the whole rigmarole every year?)

And anyway, the win-loss ratio in Ashes Tests now stands at 123 wins for Australia to 100 wins for England. So we're still second best. Which, out of 2, is last.

'We' won the battle, but the Aussies are winning the War.

SteveR_100Milers

amaferanga wrote:

Great Britain won the cricket? I didn't think we had a Great Britain team. Oh hang on a minute....

Only 1 country in 4 gives a sh@t

That's not quite true actually....

afx237vi

amaferanga wrote:

Great Britain won the cricket? I didn't think we had a Great Britain team. Oh hang on a minute....

Only 1 country in 4 gives a sh@t

Lots of Welsh people support England in cricket.

disquieting_museeuws

afx237vi wrote:

amaferanga wrote:

Great Britain won the cricket? I didn't think we had a Great Britain team. Oh hang on a minute....

Only 1 country in 4 gives a sh@t

Lots of Welsh people support England in cricket.

The term 'England' formerly stood for 'the whole of Britain' in many walks of life, that's just the way it was. Scots, Welsh and Irish have all played for England.

The Ashes started in 1877 - I still remember as a 12 year old listening on the radio to Derek Randall trying to win the Centenary match for England in Melbourne, only to fail by the same margin, 45 runs, as the in the very first match (the wheel always turns but remains forever still).

Those sorts of memories are the way I've tied my life together and made sense of it - there are more important things, of course, but cricket has a sort of folk memory that gets in the blood, partly because it's a summer game and is equated with holidays, long warm evenings, falling in love, the things that make life bearable. I still work out which summer was which by thinking about who England were playing that year, and the rest (the important bits if you like) follows on from that. Talking to any old cricket watcher or player, you share a whole set of memories and references that are closed off to anyone who doesn't 'get' the game; an incident, a bowling action, or even a tiny gesture can dredge up memories from a quarter of a century ago.

That's why the Ashes matters to me, anyway - the Tour de France, especially, is similar (except I didn't grow up with cycling) in that it's a largely unimportant and futile pursuit always won by some cyclist or other, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have impact or meaning to our lives in some way or other.

amaferanga

afx237vi wrote:

amaferanga wrote:

Great Britain won the cricket? I didn't think we had a Great Britain team. Oh hang on a minute....

Only 1 country in 4 gives a sh@t

Lots of Welsh people support England in cricket.

But I bet they don't go around saying we won the cricket.

Maybe I'm in the minority in just not getting cricket. At all.

jj1048

amaferanga wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

amaferanga wrote:

Great Britain won the cricket? I didn't think we had a Great Britain team. Oh hang on a minute....

Only 1 country in 4 gives a sh@t

Lots of Welsh people support England in cricket.

But I bet they don't go around saying we won the cricket.

Maybe I'm in the minority in just not getting cricket. At all.

Err, yes I do actually.

Pross

jj1048 wrote:

amaferanga wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

amaferanga wrote:

Great Britain won the cricket? I didn't think we had a Great Britain team. Oh hang on a minute....

Only 1 country in 4 gives a sh@t

Lots of Welsh people support England in cricket.

But I bet they don't go around saying we won the cricket.

Maybe I'm in the minority in just not getting cricket. At all.

Err, yes I do actually.

Me too. I'd rather it was called Britain or England & Wales (as the cricket board is) but they are still my national cricket team.

TheStone

I don't get it .....

..... it seems to be just a friendly match, neither team the best in the world, in a sport that only 8 (?) countries play, and in only 3 (?) is the main sport !!

On radio 5 this morning they were trying to compare it to the football world cup ffs.

Finbar Saunders

I'm not into cricket, but a win in any sport at an international level is an achievement and worthy of recognition. If Wales, Scotland or NI won a major rugby tournament it would be on the BBC. Actually, if Wales, Scotland or NI won an international cricket competition it would be on the BBC for even longer than England winning the Ashes.

I wonder "when" Wiggins wins the TdF if someone on a cricket forum will ask "So what"?

Live and let live.

Nuggs

TheStone wrote:

On radio 5 this morning they were trying to compare it to the football world cup ffs.

You're right.







Cricket's much more important than that.

davelakers

disquieting_museeuws wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

amaferanga wrote:

Great Britain won the cricket? I didn't think we had a Great Britain team. Oh hang on a minute....

Only 1 country in 4 gives a sh@t

Lots of Welsh people support England in cricket.

The Ashes started in 1877 - I still remember as a 12 year old listening on the radio to Derek Randall trying to win the Centenary match for England in Melbourne, only to fail by the same margin, 45 runs, as the in the very first match (the wheel always turns but remains forever still).

Bloody hell, you're old!!

afx237vi

Finbar Saunders wrote:

I'm not into cricket, but a win in any sport at an international level is an achievement and worthy of recognition. If Wales, Scotland or NI won a major rugby tournament it would be on the BBC. Actually, if Wales, Scotland or NI won an international cricket competition it would be on the BBC for even longer than England winning the Ashes.

I wonder "when" Wiggins wins the TdF if someone on a cricket forum will ask "So what"?

Live and let live.

They'll probably be too busy on the thread entitled "pigs flying - so what?"

Chunkers1980

amaferanga wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

amaferanga wrote:

Great Britain won the cricket? I didn't think we had a Great Britain team. Oh hang on a minute....

Only 1 country in 4 gives a sh@t

Lots of Welsh people support England in cricket.

But I bet they don't go around saying we won the cricket.

Maybe I'm in the minority in just not getting cricket. At all.

ECB = England and Wales Cricket Board. Strange but true.

carl_p

shm_uk wrote:

However, seeing as the Ashes has been contested every few years since 1882 or something, and will probably keep on going for ever and flippin' ever, it becomes a bit irrelevant who wins each time...(much like the premiership. why can't they play once, decide who's best, and leave it at that, rather than going through the whole rigmarole every year?)

Any other annual sporting events you care to embrace in that comment? Perhaps TDF? :?:

verylonglegs

Carl_P wrote:

shm_uk wrote:

However, seeing as the Ashes has been contested every few years since 1882 or something, and will probably keep on going for ever and flippin' ever, it becomes a bit irrelevant who wins each time...(much like the premiership. why can't they play once, decide who's best, and leave it at that, rather than going through the whole rigmarole every year?)

Any other annual sporting events you care to embrace in that comment? Perhaps TDF? :?:

I must admit I thought that was such a bizarre post I couldn't initially bring myself to respond to it. I doubt you'll get a logical answer.

Chip \'oyler

Look it's not often we thrash the Aussies at any sport. Let's just grab the chance to gloat and rub their noses in it because believe you me they will be back tanning our arses!

Frank the tank

Well done England, brilliant.

lucan

What I don't get is why the hype over a competition where the worst we can finish is 2nd.

Winning a world cup in any sport is an achievement because you have to beat everyone to reach the top.

What would Wimbledon be like if they just invited the third and fourth best players who played each other five times?

In the Ashes, we played a decidedly second-rate team who were way below their best and somehow we are meant to believe that this England team are fantastic. They beat a poor team convincingly. Just because they did it three times out of five doesn't make it any more impressive.

Oh, and I don't like cricket. Can you tell?

RichN95.

Lucan wrote:

What I don't get is why the hype over a competition where the worst we can finish is 2nd.

Winning a world cup in any sport is an achievement because you have to beat everyone to reach the top.

What would Wimbledon be like if they just invited the third and fourth best players who played each other five times?

In the Ashes, we played a decidedly second-rate team who were way below their best and somehow we are meant to believe that this England team are fantastic. They beat a poor team convincingly. Just because they did it three times out of five doesn't make it any more impressive.

Oh, and I don't like cricket. Can you tell?

The Ashes is not really about the standard of the sides competing, it's about history and rivalry. It has a certain status within the sport because of that. In the summer England play India - currently the no.1 team. Yet, it won't be as big a deal.

I don't know what sports you like, but I see you live in Lancashire. So it's like Blackburn v Burnley or Liverpool v Man Utd. It doesn't matter whether they're top of the Premiership or languishing mid-table in the Championship. What matters is the rivalry.

Rivalries are a cornerstone of sport, and the Ashes is one of the best.

deptfordmarmoset

What I don't fully understand is how the ''Sometimes it's hard to be an Aussie'' thread has been happily bouncing up and down the cake shop list throughout the whole series apparently without annoying anybody yet the moment the home team exceeds many cricket followers' expectations, a negative thread appears. If it's because the media suddenly want to get all triumphalist about the result, then fine, attack the media, not the achievements of the England team. If it's simply because you don't understand or like cricket, why not write about something you do understand or like? I don't like Strictly Come Dancing or X Factor so I don't watch them and I don't post about them. Well, until now, obviously...

MORNING AFTER EDIT: Apologies for last night's bad-temperedness. Somebody burst my irritabubble.

Garry H

deptfordmarmoset wrote:

What I don't fully understand is how the ''Sometimes it's hard to be an Aussie'' thread has been happily bouncing up and down the cake shop list throughout the whole series apparently without annoying anybody yet the moment the home team exceeds many cricket followers' expectations, a negative thread appears. If it's because the media suddenly want to get all triumphalist about the result, then fine, attack the media, not the achievements of the England team. If it's simply because you don't understand or like cricket, why not write about something you do understand or like? I don't like Strictly Come Dancing or X Factor so I don't watch them and I don't post about them. Well, until now, obviously...

MORNING AFTER EDIT: Apologies for last night's bad-temperedness. Somebody burst my irritabubble.

Thought that was a very fair comment. Not a huge fan of cricket myself, but rather England won than Australia. Don't get me started on the bl00dy Boat Race though

Stewie Griffin

The MCC member who gets me into Lords is Irish. Sat on the dead men's shoes waiting list for 20 years. Cracking sport to play, standing around on a sunny summers day, occasionally chasing a ball, knocking out someone's off pole or timing a drive through the covers & holding the pose as you watch the ball race to the boundary. Then both teams in the "pavilion" (read pub) for a post game beer. Lovely sport to watch too, sitting down drinking beers with a few mates on a sunny day then lunch in the Warner Pelham restaurant while watching the game through the window. What's not to like about cricket? :? You are all mad I tell you.

Frank the tank

RichN95 wrote:

Lucan wrote:

What I don't get is why the hype over a competition where the worst we can finish is 2nd.

Winning a world cup in any sport is an achievement because you have to beat everyone to reach the top.

What would Wimbledon be like if they just invited the third and fourth best players who played each other five times?

In the Ashes, we played a decidedly second-rate team who were way below their best and somehow we are meant to believe that this England team are fantastic. They beat a poor team convincingly. Just because they did it three times out of five doesn't make it any more impressive.

Oh, and I don't like cricket. Can you tell?

The Ashes is not really about the standard of the sides competing, it's about history and rivalry. It has a certain status within the sport because of that. In the summer England play India - currently the no.1 team. Yet, it won't be as big a deal.

I don't know what sports you like, but I see you live in Lancashire. So it's like Blackburn v Burnley or Liverpool v Man Utd. It doesn't matter whether they're top of the Premiership or languishing mid-table in the Championship. What matters is the rivalry.

Rivalries are a cornerstone of sport, and the Ashes is one of the best.

Bang on Rich. I like to see England/GB win at any/all sportsand you can only beat the team in front of you, which England did .