Do you agree?

The Aussies have won the last seven Ashes series, and are odds on to do the same this time around.

They already lead England 1-0, and if the expected series victory transpires, McGrath believes the Ashes urn should be moved from its present home at Lord's to a cricket museum in Australia.

Last year, Australian Prime Minister John Howard expressed the same view, and his sentiments were shared by England captain Nasser Hussain.

Should Australia get to keep the Ashes?

This debate is now closed. A selection of your emails appears below.

As an ex-pat living in Sydney I feel that due to the fragile nature of the urn and the English team that they should both stay in England.

Each Ashes series I look forward in the faint hope that we may put up a fight. But no, it's the same old story. We are an embarrassment. So yes, the urn and England please stay home. Thank goodness for the English rugby team.
Upset of Coogee, Australia

I can't think of one reason why it should stay in this country. They're playing for the Urn; they should get it when they win. Simple.
Tony Connor, England

Like most British institutions the English Cricket Board are being stubborn and old fashioned in their bid to keep to tradition. Of course the Ashes should reside in the country of the winning team.
Terry Meikle, Colombia/NZ

The only reason the Aussies don't have the Ashes, is because of the arrogant, pompous nature of the MCC and their delusion that the home of cricket is still England. Cricket in this country died years ago, just a pity the MCC members didn't die with it. Australia fully deserve to gloat, we are an embarrassment to what is a great game.
Marc, England.

While he makes a fair point, McGrath's comments are intended as another piece of Australian psychology. This issue usually surfaces in the middle of Ashes contests when Australia are leading, so it's hardly surprising that it should come up again now.

If the Aussies do manage to retain the Ashes this time round, then after 2003 the famous urn can be kept in the cupboard where the rugby union World Cup used to be.
Roy Pinney, England

The Ashes ARE NOT a trophy in the true sense and belong to the MCC not the ICC. As such the 'urn' is not being physically played for as a trophy. The fact that the Ashes are steeped in nearly as much history of this fine sport as the game itself should be enough.

If Merv had offered to shave his moustache off, or indeed Boony had offered to donate the 650 empty beer cans from the flight home, to the Melbourne Cricket Club would they immediately become a 'trophy' that any visiting team could vie for?

Sorry Aussies you can't have them, they are ours, not yours, like an old relative, we in England have little but memories of former greatness, please leave us our only souvenir from a bygone age.
Mathew Elliot, England

Anyone with half a brain knows that the Ashes are just a symbol, something to play for, and it's typical of an arrogant Aussie to suggest keeping them. Good grief !
Derek Tyler, Cayman Islands

If the urn is genuinely too fragile to move then it should stay where it is. The symbolism of owning the actual ashes is a far second to preserving a piece of history that, in many ways, is the only thing left that embodies cricket's finest moments.
John, UK

And then we wonder why many of our youngsters are no longer interested in playing and following cricket. The question from the Aussie press should have read: "Given these results, is anyone playing cricket anywhere?!"
Mark, Barbados, West Indies

What Ashes? It's lost all its significance and the English are still having delusions of grandeur. It's high time Australia stopped playing these series and instead played better teams.
Rajeev, US

If England manage to win the Rugby World Cup next year, we'll keep it here in Australia. Sounds fair doesn t it?
Adrian, Australia

Nah! They'll have a few beers and drop the urn or use it as an ashtray.
Ed, Australia

I agree with Glenn McGrath - if the Aussies win the Ashes, then surely they should get to keep the spoils until the Poms can win them back again - if ever!
Piet Grobler, Zimbabwe

The trophy should reside with the winner, as is the case in all other sports.
Ian Thompson, Sweden

Frankly, I couldn't care less about the urn. I think our boys are just getting bored with beating England, and perhaps they are starting to concentrate on the sentimental aspects of the series. The urn is as fragile as the English batting order, leave it where it is.
David, Australia

Certainly the urn should go to Australia if they win the series. Lord's always come up with the excuse that the urn is too fragile to transport, but with today's technology I'm sure there is some way of packaging the little urn and flying it safely to Australia.

We had this debate last year when the Aussies won The Ashes, so let's just sort it out and let them have the real trophy - if they win of course.
Vicki Causer, Pom-Land

I am getting sick of all this negative talk about the England cricket team as if they are a team of deadbeats and no-hopers. Yes, Australia are dominant at the moment, but these things go in cycles. Australia won't always be number one and England aren't currently as bad as many are claiming them to be.

The simple fact is that this Australian team is probably one of the three best ever to play the game. Only last year they hammered the team that was supposedly number two, as they have hammered every other team in recent years.

So let's get off England's backs for a while, and instead just appreciate a cricket team that comes along only once in a generation. Oh, and the old Urn - it doesn't really matter where it is held does it?
Greg, Australia

I'm sure most people will agree that the Aussies have won the urn so many times in succession that they (like Brazil in World Cup football) should be allowed to keep the trophy, and the competition scrapped to be replaced by a multinational event, which would be of more significance in the present day.
Harry Collins, Scotland

I believe the Ashes trophy should stay where it is...it's the only way the English public would ever get a look at it!!
J Jones, Australia

After winning seven consecutive Ashes series and on course for the eighth one, Australia should keep the Ashes. It's not fair on part of England to keep the Ashes after their dismal performance.

If the Ashes remain in England anytime longer then I'm afraid it would lose its glory and it would indeed be a shame.
Venkatesh, India

Well, it might provide some motivation for the English to fight harder for the Ashes if they didn't actually HAVE them in safe keeping. In fact, the MCC is doing a disservice to their own side, really.
Julia Bartlett, Australia

I think the winner should get the honours and the prize. I realize that there is a tradition, and the English conventionally like to stick with it, but it is not fair to undermine the greatness of a cricketing team to defend an antiquated ritual.

The Ashes trophy is the most prestigious cricketing trophy in the world, and it should decorate the winner's shelf. It is not only ridiculous to deny it from those who deserve it; it is also embarrassing for it to be kept by those who do not deserve it.

If you want to have it, you got to win it; it is as simple as that.
Kiran Bharthapudi, IL, USA

Yes. England have to return the Ashes. It is long overdue as it does not belong to the England any more. They have lost seven of the last Ashes series.

It would be appropriate for the Australians to hold it with pride. If England does well in the future then they can stake claim. This at least gives the English the motivation to improve their game. Time to wake up, England, if you are to reach world standards.
Denukaran Isaacs, Singapore

I think the Sshes should go to whoever wins the series. The Pommy tradition of keeping the original Ashes is far too outdated. I think it's time the mother country handed the Ashes to their rightful owner (which for now is the Aussies).

Perhaps if the Aussies get to keep the Ashes it will spur action and improvement in those English gentlemen and lead to a real rip-snorter of a Test series they we (both Aussies and Poms) have been looking forward to.
Michael Voukolos, Australia

Let the statistics decide. Since it's inception, the Ashes have been held by the Aussies for 70 years and England for 50 years. The Aussies held it for 19 years from 1934 and have been holding it for 13 years now since 1989.

The longest England have held the Ashes is nine years from 1912, and before that, for eight years from 1884. Let's face it. Ever since the times of the three Gs, i.e., Gooch, Gatting and Gower, England have not won the Ashes at all.

And the three have been gone for over 10 years now. This clearly shows that England continues to play the Ashes series thanks to history and tradition alone and not for cricketing reasons any more.
Maheshkumar M, India

Of course Australia should keep the Ashes. In fact, they should have been handed it a long time ago. It is typical of the English cricketing authorities to have staunchly defended such a ludicrous, outdated custom for so long.

It's time the Aussies got what they deserved - and once it's over there I suspect it'll be a long time before it comes back to the home of cricket. With that incentive, maybe we'll get an England team worthy of lifting the little trophy once again.
G Tong, Coventry, UK