Watson wins the game with a six in the last over.

Aus win by 6 wickets

Frankly I don't blame him. It's the poorest form of the game for me and completely pales into insignificance alongside a major Test series. I don't mind the odd T20 match, but seven 50 overs games between the same two teams is just going to be dross. Then we've got the six week bore-fest that is the ICC World Cup. The last one was the worst ever and they've kept the same bloated format for this one. Roll on the new English season in April.

Fully agree.

Am I imagining things or did the ODI series (of 3 or 5 games) used to take place before the test series? I'm sure they used to act as a warm up to the main event of the tests (in our summers anyway), I did passively watch the second half of the Aussie innings when I got up this morning, but I find it hard to get too excited by it.

As for the World Cup I'm sure I'll take an interest in it - once it gets to the Quarter Final stage.

That was certainly the case in our home series - three ODIs before the Test series, although I think they've always been after the Tests down under, and there always used to be a third team involved. The format was everyone plays each other four times and the top two contested a final.

Surely it can't be a coincidence that the team that wins the Ashes always seems to lose the ODI series? The Aussies even managed to lose them after the notorious Ashes whitewash four years ago.

Don't like ODI's, prefer Tests and then 20/20 matches. Great knock by Watson. England need an extra batsmen in the side, too many bits and pieces cricketers.

They had six specialist batsmen in the side for the first ODI - Strauss, Davies, Trott, Pietersen, Bell and Morgan.

Hence they were scratching around for a sixth bowling option in the middle of the Australian innings.

England got done by an outstanding knock from Shane Watson, that was the difference between the two sides IMO.

Haddin looked like he had gloves of steel

Trott, Bell & Pietersen were all reasonable part-time bowlers in county cricket before they established themselves for England. The trouble is that they never get asked to bowl much for England and play so seldom for their counties that they never get any bowling practice. Part-time bowlers need to be given a role regularly, not just asked to suddenly produce the goods when we're desperate.

So let me get this right.

You would prefer a game thats dragged out over 5 days (unless a few of them get rained off) where the run rate could be around 2.5 an over to one thats over in just one day where a run rate of 6 or 7 is about normal?



I don't particularly like any form of cricket but at least a one day game is slightly interesting. It's great when a side need 50 runs from 30 or so balls under flood lights and they really need to push things along a bit.

Test cricket

On a thread dedicated to the Ashes series, I don't think you're going to get much support here. Test cricket is a fascinating tactical battle. Sadly some people don't have the attention span for it.