leicsmac

That part of that sentence is having to do some very, very heavy lifting imo. And I feel now we're approaching the crux of the matter and a proposed solution; some particular demographics of people are apparently more inclined to mistreat women so simply focus on making them no longer part of the equation and that is the whole solution, yes?

As being socially inequal to them. Which, as mentioned before, could (but only could) be more of a factor in a world where such inequality of any kind is prevalent and accepted.

I'm inclined to think that an more inequal world creates an environment where some people are much more likely to think and believe that other people and demographics aren't equal to them and act accordingly to abuse power over them (such as in this case), but I'd be interested to hear other ideas.

Put it this way, one of the things you see when travelling is far greater abominations than pineapple that are put on pizzas, so...meh.

We've needed one of those for over 10 years. It may well be one of the key reasons this team isn't scaling the greatest heights. Test quality English spin bowlers are as rare as unicorn shit.

Perhaps as inequality increases economically, it likewise increases socially. So yes, among other issues, it could well get worse.

And then society somehow has to arrive at a workable solution, which is in no way as simple as some people appear to think.

And if that was my argument, then I would agree. But it's not, so it's not, and I think we're rather talking past each other here. Let me be clear, once more: there certainly is a problem. It's becoming bigger, and it's the latest iteration of a long history of misogyny that has gone on for hundreds of years. And it certainly requires addressing. I hope that, at least, is agreeable.

You could well be onto something there tbh. Though I'm not going to judge Smith too harshly - Foakes (assume he is the reference here) is a better gloveman but Smith certainly hasn't done badly all round himself.

Now let's look at the pre-2000 historical data going back a few hundred years, and include instances of institutional misogyny as well. That's what I mean about it not being a new problem - it's an old one, just raising its head again after being thankfully quietened for a decade or two. It's clear it's on the uptick once more and that clearly needs sorting, no disagreement whatsoever there.

Not yet, but it's good to have it there and I'm intending to head there myself sometime soon.

Once again though, this is hardly a new problem, institutional or everyday, even though the methods have become more sophisticated. The problem certainly exists, I'm just not sure about some of takes on the exact nature of it and therefore the solutions.

On a related matter, good to see the Fail with their usual dose of UK exceptionalism and European declinism on the front page with respect to Erasmus, despite only 15% of polled people actually being opposed to the idea itself.

Tbf England didn't lose any of the subsequent three Tests after the one he missed that he was involved in, so that might not have been the only factor there. But yes, it was really around 2009ish(?) that the England team really became a force.

Is there not a possibility that this side has hit its ceiling, barring a certain amount of luck? One would hope not and the issue is, as you say, down to match management.

I'm old enough to remember the England team of the 90s and early 00s getting humbled by the Aussies whenever they played. There was a lot of different "solutions" thought up by the ECB then, none of them appeared to work until 2005.

I think that someone else mentioned that the England losses in India and Oz tend to be blowouts rather than in any way close, which is true and concerning in its own way.

Honestly, I think the only nation that really punches above its weight in that regard is the Saffers. I would expect England to take on all comers at home and all away with the exception of India and Aus, but I would merely hope, rather than expect, they would be able to challenge in India or Aus, because history shows quite clearly just how difficult it is for any touring team to deliver in either. And I think that is about where England are right now.

The Aussies have arrogance running through their every body cell when it comes to cricket. The key matter is having the results to back it up. They, most often, do.

As if both of those demographics haven't been given a hard time in terms of social status for the last few hundred years no matter the situation. This certainly isn't anywhere near a solution, but it does recognise a problem exists and it's sadly not really a new one, just the latest iteration rearing its head thanks to social media.

At the risk of asking a rhetorical question, I have to ask; why? I'm only guessing here, but perhaps it's because there is the expectation that the England cricket team should always be up there with the best despite competing with football, rugby and a fair few other sports in terms of talent input and output?

I guess all of this also just goes to show how good - both in terms of talent and mentality - the England team of 2009-2012 was.

And zero series losses at home and two (likely soon to be three) away in 13. Given how they've played here I can understand why people are giving pelters, though. Can't disagree at all with that, there's clearly been a costly miscalculation and whatever they've trained for our done leading up to this series isn't working in practice.

Also, pardon me for not entirely getting on the reactionary misery bandwagon here, but as the stats clearly show, Oz is really not an easy place to tour, no matter who you are. That being said, the manner and attitude of the defeats, rather than the defeats themselves, is worrying.

It worked in terms of results for a while. However, it has been shown to categorically not work in the toughest of places against the toughest of opposition.