13 Feb 2005 21:04:57
Rob
England - tired again

Why do England tire so easily?

I can think of countless tours over the last few years where we've gone
backwards and I would argue it's been a disappointing winter all round.
Beating Zim 5-0 was nothing other than a formality. We should have beaten
SA more than 2-1 in tests and now losing 4-1 in the ODIs is obviously a
disappointment.

Really right from the off in the one-dayers, England looked tired and there
really isn't an excuse for that. They probably started about a fortnight
ago and England had only been in SA for 6 weeks before then. Obviously we
can all remember Ashes tours that have gone on for months on end, but
England seem to tire much more quickly than other sides. Is it fitness,
management - or what?

I'm afraid I blame the ECB (again) for this. The ICC are the usual
villains, but if short tours are the future, then squads have to be bigger
and most importantly there has to be sufficient cricket for squad players.
An A tour to the same country at the same time would be the obvious choice
IMHO.

It appears England _could_ not risk Batty or Anderson - and this at a time
where our bowling was depleted. I don't mind so much that Anderson was out
of form, but he's had no cricket since his test appearance - so how's he
supposed to return to form without playing? Nets alone won't do.

ECB are going to have to expand the budget!




14 Feb 2005 00:26:55
TF
Re: England - tired again


"Rob" <gofyself@wrong.address.com > wrote in message
news:ZhPPd.472$D_3.86@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
> Why do England tire so easily?
>
> I can think of countless tours over the last few years where we've gone
> backwards and I would argue it's been a disappointing winter all round.
> Beating Zim 5-0 was nothing other than a formality. We should have
> beaten SA more than 2-1 in tests and now losing 4-1 in the ODIs is
> obviously a disappointment.
>

In a word, Bollocks. SA are a hard side to beat at home, particularly with
half our side out of form, so to beat them by any scoreline is an
achievement. Personally I'm not too bothered about the ODIs, it's the tests
that matter. If we only beat Australia 1-0 will you be disappointed with
that aswell?

TF




14 Feb 2005 09:46:29
SunStormRider
Re: England - tired again

"TF" <tony.foster2@tesco.net > wrote in message news:<jfSPd.1775$ma4.315@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net>...
> "Rob" <gofyself@wrong.address.com> wrote in message
> news:ZhPPd.472$D_3.86@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
> > Why do England tire so easily?
> >
> > I can think of countless tours over the last few years where we've gone
> > backwards and I would argue it's been a disappointing winter all round.
> > Beating Zim 5-0 was nothing other than a formality. We should have
> > beaten SA more than 2-1 in tests and now losing 4-1 in the ODIs is
> > obviously a disappointment.
> >
>
> In a word, Bollocks. SA are a hard side to beat at home, particularly with
> half our side out of form, so to beat them by any scoreline is an
> achievement. Personally I'm not too bothered about the ODIs, it's the tests
> that matter. If we only beat Australia 1-0 will you be disappointed with
> that aswell?
>
> TF

So what's that got to do with OP's question of why England tire so
easily? In fact I agree with OP, we were tired. Had we not have
been we'd have thumped the lacklustre SA. They may be tough to beat,
but we're number 2 in the world and we should have thumped them by
more than 2-1.

And if you think the Ashes has any chance of being settled by a
difference of one match between the sides, make sure you post to this
group when you wake up.

Sun


15 Feb 2005 10:40:05
Triple Jumper
Re: England - tired again

They're not tired - they're homesick.
All except Pietersen...

:)

Rob wrote:
> Why do England tire so easily?
>
> I can think of countless tours over the last few years where we've gone
> backwards and I would argue it's been a disappointing winter all round.
> Beating Zim 5-0 was nothing other than a formality. We should have beaten
> SA more than 2-1 in tests and now losing 4-1 in the ODIs is obviously a
> disappointment.
>
> Really right from the off in the one-dayers, England looked tired and there
> really isn't an excuse for that. They probably started about a fortnight
> ago and England had only been in SA for 6 weeks before then. Obviously we
> can all remember Ashes tours that have gone on for months on end, but
> England seem to tire much more quickly than other sides. Is it fitness,
> management - or what?
>
> I'm afraid I blame the ECB (again) for this. The ICC are the usual
> villains, but if short tours are the future, then squads have to be bigger
> and most importantly there has to be sufficient cricket for squad players.
> An A tour to the same country at the same time would be the obvious choice
> IMHO.
>
> It appears England _could_ not risk Batty or Anderson - and this at a time
> where our bowling was depleted. I don't mind so much that Anderson was out
> of form, but he's had no cricket since his test appearance - so how's he
> supposed to return to form without playing? Nets alone won't do.
>
> ECB are going to have to expand the budget!
>
>