I was wondering when, apart from last year, has McGrath really been wrong with his prediction about the Ashes or rather about any batsman that he has targetted before a series? (don't think he pre targetted Vaughn before that tour of 2003 to Australia).

Thing is, anyone who knows about the hold he and Warne collectively have/or definitely had till 2005 Ashes on an average English cricketers' psyche (some like Mike Atherton's were scarred for ever) would credit the fluke accident/steeping over a ball and twistIng his ankle incident before the second Test as having played as big a role in England retaining the Ashes as Flintoff's heroics or Vaughan's captaincy.

Warne almost did it single handedly, just imagine if he had McGrath with his suffocating accuracy backing him in all those Tests, I would have thought 4-1 if not 5-0 would definetly had been on.

Well, you can't always go wrong, McGrath. I am perhaps unaware of how precise of a prescient McGrath is, however, I must say he is closer to being right this time around.

McGrath may be the only Aussie to come out of the last Ashes scrap with being mentally scarred. He can put his head on the pillow knowing he has not lost a lives Ashes Test since 1997. This latest comment bears testament to the fact that he feels certain he is unlikely to lose another one.

McGrath is the undisputed top trump rabbit in the hat this series. His bunnies may well be Bell and Pietersen who both seem to have a weakness outside the off stump and I cannot imagine he is likely to step on another cricket ball!

McGrath, McGrath, McGrath, how I detest thee whilst admiring thou handiwork (or something to that effect). 5 - 0? Seems a little far fetched to me, but that misses the point of what the statement is all about. It's immaterial whether its an accurate prediction, the point of it as usual is to project a mind set for the opposition. In short McGrath believes that to be successful one must project the image of success. In Australia that seems to be swaggering, posturing and a number of other tired routines.

Will Australia win 5-0 or 4-0 or 3-0? McGrath was making the same noises last year and has now been reduced to claiming that if he had been playing, those matches would not have been lost. Which begs the question, if McGrath sees the Australian side as so dependent on himself, then what does he see for the future of Australian cricket? After all the great fast bowler is surely not delusional enough to predict another 5 more years of international cricket for himself, is he?

We must look upon his words for what they are; a ritual. Like a warrior preparing himself for war, McGrath is following a time honored tradition of smack talk before the fight. If he needs to say it to believe it, then our reactions to his comments are superfluous to say the least.

The English team carries the hopes of an entire nation, and perhaps all the cricketing world, but I'm betting McGrath will be ready when this battle comes.

McGrath, Warne, McGill, Lee !

The first three were great bowlers once, but that time has passed.

I'm sure even McGrath thinks he still has it, but when his ancient frame rumbles in next month, I doubt the English batsmen will treat him any differently from any number of modest International trundlers.

Other than the first test in 2005 McGrath did nothing in England (when he played) and I bet he's only got older and slower since.

Looking at this from another perspective :

Gough still looked the part in domestic cricket in England in 2006, but after being given a go in the ODI's was wisely dropped.
Talisman or not, his time had passed, and, importantly England have plenty of very talented younger players to bring in.
Ten years ago a bowler of Broad's ability would have been picked no matter what (diapers and all) now he has to wait his turn on the English pace conveyor belt.

Tait, Clark and Mitchell are probably the future for the Aussies.

But I'm betting the Oz selectors stick with the "Dad's army" bowling attack that worked in the mid 90's

Rather than bow out on top, they risk leaving the game as beaten shadows of their former selves - and even a Pom like me thinks they deserve better than that.

The thing is before the last Ashes Mcgrath's comments looked a lot more pertinent given how one-sided the previous contests had been. In fact he initially said 4-0 to Australia with time lost to rain, only modifying this after the rout at Lords. Now his comments just look deeply self-delusional, coupled with his statement that he is faster than ever.

The targeting a batsman stuff is pretty laughable as well, for a start does anyone believe that he makes special plans for one player or tries particularly hard to get one out. Before 2003 he targeted Vaughan (how did that end I wonder?), last year he targeted Strauss and Vaughan. Considering Strauss took centuries off him in both the matches Mcgrath was fit in, this doesn't look such a great claim either.

Stop it Glenn, Nostradamus you ain't, these predictions are just opening yourself to deserved ridicule and certainly aren't winning any mind-games. The more self-delusional and in denial you are the better we like it.

Excellent. Gotta love McGrath. And his attitude is absolutely right. As much as England will smirk and point to his last entry in the fortune tellers' most innacurate and outrageous predictions contest, they will be nervously thinking "this time he might be right..."

As most people have noticed it is merely the usual psychological stunt before a big series. But as McGrath rightly claims, to think otherwise is negative. He knows that if Australia play close to their potential they will win comfortably. Last year they played poorly, even in parts of the first test which they won. England could hardly have played better throughout the series. Yet the result was close, and in the end it could easily have gone the other way. In the end it served as a kind of wake-up call. Australia have since improved considerably and England have spluttered.

There are some important differences this time around to justify McGrath's swagger. Australia will no longer have one or two weak links in their bowling attack. Anyone who dismisses McGrath as too old and past his prime is an idiot. Ditto Warne. Lee is on fire and much less prone to being smacked around these days. Mitchell Johnson and Shaun Tait will worry England with pace and swing. Look out for Shane Watson too, nobody seems to rate his bowling but he's quick and he's learned to swing it.

Also, England will no longer mesmerise everyone with reverse swing / ball tampering (depending on who does it and whether we like them or not). Three reasons for that are (1) the ball here is different and doesn't swing as much, (2) the pitches are not as abrasive and the ball doesn't get as scuffed, and (3) once again Simon Jones is having his body reassembled with sticky tape and will not be playing.

Barring any freak accidents, multiple injuries, bad weather, or terrorism, McGrath's prediction - shightly tongue-in-cheek though it may be - shouldn't be too far from the mark.

Yeah well, Paul Clarke, you Poms said McGrath and Warne were over the hill last time around too, which made me laugh out loud. Apart from the first test, he took a five-wicket haul at Old Trafford when he wasn't even fit, nor was he at The Oval.

Also funny how you name Clark as the future, while he is already 30+.

3-1 to Australia. I bet even McGrath himself doesn't believe his statement of 5-0.

I think England are getting carried away by one home series. Ever since I can remember, McGrath has been the scourge of English batsmen.England have always been weak and the last series was a combination of Billy Bowden"s crooked finger, reminding us of Low Rowan and Colin Egar only working against the Aussies this time, shoddy Australian catching and Gilchrists poor trot.

If England wins again, I for one will accept that it is not a mere flash in the pan. McGrath is entitled to his shout and the disbelieving few(read English} just need to check out the old Ashes score cards.How long can he continue?Definitely for this year's Ashes.To speak of Gough and McGrath in the same breath or same league seems parochialism.

You can hardly call McGrath's comments 'predictions'. They have become routine pre-series statements which simply occupy the back pages for a few days. It's a fairly pointless question for a journo to ask and Glenn is right- to say anyhting other than 5-0 would be stupid. Plus, he's probably going to be right this time round. The only Tests England will win will be dead rubbers, and due to the nature of the last two Tests (one at the MCG with 100,000 people each day, and the other the final Test in Sydney) there won't be any tests that will be treated as dead rubbers. So I'm with you Glenn! Here's to a 5-0 trouncing, and taking the Ashes back off the mother country.

Funny critters who fall for the rubbish about Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne being past it. Similar treatment was being dished out to Shane Warne prior to the last Ashes series, a series in which he took 40 wickets. In fact, it's fair to say that since the Australian summer of 1999-2000 (Aus v Pak, Aus v Ind) Warne is either written off as past it or lauded as an interminable genius depending on the most recent innings - by the less observant pundits anyhow.

I don't think McGrath's prediction merits too much analysis. Just as it is foolish for any cricketer to enter a game without confidence, it is foolish for any cricketer to enter a series without confidence. You certainly don't reach the heights that McGrath has reached by doubting yourself, your abilities and the abilities of your team. Whether the 5-0 prediction is "gamesmanship", confidence, or optimism is something we won't find out until McGrath pens an autobiography.

As for England's victory at Sydney last time around - that was without Warne and McGrath, so I don't think too much can be read into that. And good luck getting a draw at Adelaide - people are fond of talking about how flat it is, but despite that there has been one draw in the last 15 tests at Adelaide (South Africa in 97/98).

I do think there were other factors at play in the 2005 Ashes, also, but the most obvious factor in Australiia's defeat was the inability of most of the batting order to hang around. I doubt very much that lightning will strike again.

"Yet the result was close, and in the end it could easily have gone the other way."

Surely it's time this myth was put to rest? It might be true in that the series went down to the wire, but a "close" series in any meaningful sense should imply that the number of sessions won and lost were divided fairly equally between the two teams. This palpably didn't happen. Australia lost significantly more than they won. What saved their pride was a handful of incredible passages of play when, mainly thanks to Shane Warne, they did so well as to almost wipe out their deficit. Warne's good enough to do the same again, and with just a little support the 2006/07 series could have a very different result. However, it devalues his achievement in 2005 to suggest that his team-mates *didn't* (with a couple of exceptions) monumentally underachieve. It also devalues England's efforts (particularly those of the bowlers) to suggest that they played no part in enforcing that underachievement.

McGrath's predictions are to be treated more as part of a ritual than anything else. He tells them to get the competitive juices flowing. As for Australian bowling as a whole, it isn't the same without McGrath and Warne in it. Good as they might be, Lee, Tait, Stuart Clark etc. aren't the same in a test match without the two of them. We've seen how Indians, world cricket's worst travellers thrashed the Aussie bowling around a couple of years back when McGrath and Warne were missing, an Aussie attack that did have Gillespie in prime, Lee coming back from injury, Brad Williams, Nathan Bracken, Andy Bichel, and Stuart MacGill. All these bowlers who looked great bowling in tandem with McGrath and Warne suddenly looked rather ordinary without them.

England, sadly, might not have similar comforts since both McGrath and Warne seem pretty fit right now. Moreover, for England to be a truly deserving Ashes winner, I guess they would need to beat an Aussie side that has both McGrath and Warne in it. That, more than anything, might prove that it was not a flash in the pan last year.

So when the Aussies win it's because they play great cricket, and when they lose it's because they underperform.

Gotta renmind these "parochial" Aussies that two teams played last year, and the better team won.

The sooner you accept that, the sooner you'll admit that fielding a bunch of 40 year olds has got a limited shelf life and move on.

You risk becoming like the West Indies of the mid 90's, still a few great players, but shouting "Not listening" at the top of your voice when somebody mentions the wholsale changes that your soon going to be forced to make.

Hayden, Ponting, Langer, Gilchrist, Warne, McGrath, Martyn ..... I doubt we'll see any of them in Ashes 2009 - and definately not Gillespie or Casper. Even the permaent understudies (McGill, Symonds) will probably be past it ...

So who else you got ? More importantly if they are younger than these geriatrics,and worth a place in the side, then why aren't they playing?

The debates about the relative merits of the teams notwithstanding (although, both sides contain several players with much to prove), McGrath's comments indicate that he's one of the few sportsmen around who realise that sport is about fun. He has great fun in making these comments, his tongue is clearly in his cheek, and it displays what a character he is. The one person not taking this series too seriously is a man who is still capable of wreaking as much havoc as anyone who will play. I'd be surprised if he plays every test in such a (ludicrously) intense programme, but I hope that if this is his last hurrah, he gets plenty of wickets (in a losing cause please!) , a fitting end to a fine career.

As Tim rightly points out 5-0 is pretty unlikely but McGrath is publicly stating his optimism rather than trying for strict accuracy. On the other hand he has been pretty good at targetting opposition batsmen throughout his career, so I wouldn't underestimate his pronouncements on that score.

I have to say that I was very worried when McGrath came back from a long lay-off for ankle surgery and said he was in the form of his life. To tell the truth I thought he was being unrealistic. I also thought he would have a hard time coming back after his wife's first struggle with breast cancer but he did come back very strongly and performed really well. Just like he said he would.

So if he says he's in good form I am inclined to believe him, he knows his own game very, very well and I'm not qualified to second-guess him. He may not be the best prognosticator as far as series scores are concerned, but we shouldn't make the mistake of thinking he's delusional or unrealistic. McGrath is a bright, well grounded individual who knows himself and his game inside out.

Thanks to Last year's Ashes series the Australian management and fans have become very much aware that many of the current crop of players are nearing the end of their careers. Selectorial policy has changed to give more players exposure at international level and there are a lot of exciting prospects waiting in the wings. Clark, Clarke, Johnson, Tait, Bracken, Cosgrove, Hussey (the OTHER Hussey), Hodge, Cullen, White, and Haddin to name only the more prominent.

I don't see any reason for Australian fans to despair.

I have to very much commend Glenn McGrath on his attitude. will Australia win 5-0? probably no, and i'm hoping for an england victory. But hes right about his attitude - as a proffesional sportsman, the thought of defeat isn't one which you should entertain. How many times did Ali say "Actually, it's gonna be a pretty close thing"? Did you ever hear Bill Shankley say "We're going into this game knowing that they'll probably score a few and might even win the game"? Never. As a sportsman your one aim is victory.

I hope England ram his prediction straight back down his throat, but i won't ever criticise a sportsman for having the attitude of trying to win every game.

5-0 will only happen if Englands quick bowlers dont fire/stay fit, but I feel they will, I 90% dont think England can avoid defeat but its going to be close, are people forgetting that when England play Australia they are well pumped for it ??? As said previously even the worst England sides of the 90's did not lose 5-0, Englands batting is too good for 5-0 imo, the top six are a good unit, if Monty can do well then we may even sneak a 2-2 draw, but 2-1 or 3-1 look nearer to the mark.

It's endlessly amusing how people react to Glenn McGrath. Each new series I think to myself "okay nobody will bat an eyelid this time and Glenn's comments will pass into the ether."

But sure enough, we have a blog about it, and it seems there are still some amazing bites. If any England player alters one iota of focus from their preparations for the tour, he's hit his mark.

I'm not sure how you can criticise McGrath for his comments as saying anything else would be to conceed defeat in at least one match. It would be akin to asking a player on the day of a match how he thinks the team will go only to get the response "I think they have us covered this time."

McGrath's attitude is one that all elite sportsman should share as any player that plays at a high level should go into every match expecting to win and not consider any other result.

I have a bet with my Dad (an Englishman) that the Ashes will be decided in Australia's favour by the end of this year (after 4 tests). Go Aussie Go! ;)

McGrath has earnt the right to predict whatever he wants before the start of a series. I very much doubt it will be 5-0, but it won't be anywhere near as close as last year, with a lot more in Australia's favour. This year, England are the team with the injuries, and Australia is the one that has much improved players (Lee, Watson) and has uncovered new talent (Hussey, Hodge, Johnson, Clark)

With five matches up for grabs who wouldn't want to win all of them? If everyone else shows that same sort of attitude, we're going to be in for a competetive series with plenty of action and little or no negative play.

McGrath can say what he wants. Even though his comments are always lighthearted he backs up his words without fail. Both England's wins in 05 were when McGrath wasn't playing. In fact he hasn't played in a losing Ashes Test since 2001, and that was because Gilly handed England the win with that declaration.

Let's face it, McGrath is a stirrer at heart, and he would have stopped making these comments years ago had the English failed to jump up and down about them even once. He mainly does it to get a rise, and he gets one every time.

McGrath may be bad at 'predicting' a 5-0 series score line, but, cannot think of anyone else who has the ability to 'walk the talk' and deliver what he promises...... if it is to be a 5-0 series, McGrath will have had plenty to do to ensure it.......

What have England done since the last ashes series??, not a great deal.Australia seem to have strengthened once again after being beaten by yes probably a better team in the last seies,In Australia ,on our pitches with our crowd 4/1 looks very likely..
McGrath still the best test bowler by far, he just does it again and again.A fully firing pigeon ...look out....

As you said yourself, McGrath's comments are more of a statement of intent - so as to say "We are going to beat you!" rather than a prediction based on any kind of observation.

The fact that he feels making such a statement is necessary seems silly to me but as I see it there's no harm in it - the reporters get a bit to talk about, Warne gets a chance to talk about his mate, the English get a chance to say "Yeah, we will see.." so its just another addition to the Ashes buildup.

Believe me, it would be fun to tease him when his prediction goes wrong - remember Shoaib Akhtar before/after the Ind-Pak match in World Cup 2003? So its not bad that he is making such noises - it would serve as ammunition when the 'prediction' goes wrong, which, I'm sure, it would (5-0!!!).

Good on him, hes exactly right too. If the aussies believe they have a better team and a better chance of winning the ashes then why not 5-0? As he said, which matches are they expecting to lose?

No qualms with McGrath saying five-nil in favor of Australia. It's better than sledging.

Yes, McGrath took 5for at Old Trafford - when England were batting for a declaration and couldn't have cared less, and he finished up getting smashed round the park by Geraint Jones, who doesn't even merit a place in the team these days. McGrath is still a very good bowler, but probably not as good as he was a few years ago. Warne, on the other hand, is at least as good if not better - but who else? Lee fired in the second innings at Trent Bridge and did very little in the rest of the series; Gillespie/Kasprowicz/MacGill/Johnson/Tait/Bracken/whoever else they end up picking as the fourth bowler isn't likely to have much of an impact. Having said that, after Flintoff, Harmison and Hoggard I can't really see the rest of the England attack doing much either.

McGrath's claims that Australia would win series by 5-0,meant he is certainly overconfident about their team and the rivals weaknesses.Even Steve Waugh did not make that prediction during his last ashes series.Apart from win and loss,there are three other things 1.draw,2.tie,3.no result.

I'm not for one moment going to say that McGrath is anything less than a wonderful bowler but i would like to point out that apart from at Lords McGrath didn't bowl all that well. Although he was more accurate and consistent than most of the other back-ups he still didn't trouble the English batsmen all that greater regularity. I can remember him picking up another five-for but that was when England were slogging out in the quest for quick runs and most of the wickets were caught out on the boundary. Hardly classic McGrath dismissals!

Yeah, right mate. We're really scared of Mahmood at Perth. He might only go for 8 runs per over.

Michael Jones said "Gillespie/Kasprowicz/MacGill/Johnson/Tait/Bracken/whoever else they end up picking as the fourth bowler isn't likely to have much of an impact."

Have you forgotten MacGill's 12 for in Sydney against England in 98/99? MacGill, like Warne, has not diminished with age. If anything, he has also gotten better as he matured.

Gillespie has improved out of sight since the last ashes, Tait is improving all the time and would do better on the Australian wickets, and Bracken has an economy rate of 2.72 in tests, which, although he hasnt got a lot of wickets as yet, will help get wickets at the other end (e.g. at Brisbane last year, where Lee got his first 5 for in a long time)

I wouldn't expect him to say anything else. He is a top top bowler and if he had played throughout the Ashes, Oz probably would have won.

This is two years later and the England top 6 is probably stronger. I don't think he will run thru England this time, tied series for me, Ashes retained.

Geez isn't it great to revisit this blog after the fact and say "5-0 it was NEVER in doubt"