Ashes 2006/07 = Walkover?

[Top_Cat]

First Simon Jones is out for the series, Ash Giles is injured and now Vaughan;

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ausveng/content/current/story/251829.html

I also think it's a matter of time before Freddie is injured with his workload.

So the question needs to be asked; will this year's series be a total fizzer? I must admit, I'm thinking it will be. Two of England's crucial successes in Ashes 2005 were in aggressive and skilfull old-ball bowling and excellent planning. Now, the two players most responsible for those are out. Couple this with England's struggles against SL and it's not a pretty picture.

What does everyone else think?

 

[Neil Pickup]

I'm seriously contemplating not getting up to watch.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Without wanting to tempt fate, I'm inclined to agree. While England were obviously the better team last year, you have to get the feeling when you look at results since that it was very much a good moment for England and a bad moment for Australia, and is unlikely to be repeated - at least not this year.

I'd also say that Australia have generally improved as a side since the Ashes, with the introduction of Hussey, the return of Gillespie to some semblance of form, the appearance of Stuart Clark and so on. Lee has come of age as a bowler in a huge way and is capable of leading an attack, Hayden has had a good season too, and Ponting is in the form of his life. England on the other hand haven't won a series, and have been torn apart by injuries and poor form, and exposed for depth in the bowling department. It'll take a monumental turnaround to win a series in Australia, given that nobody has done it in 14 years.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

It'll take a monumental turnaround to win a series in Australia, given that nobody has done it in 14 years.

Actually, they only have to draw...

*prays for placid wickets, rain, and Collingwood to make repeated McGlew-style innings*

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Actually, they only have to draw...

*prays for placid wickets, rain, and Collingwood to make repeated McGlew-style innings*

They only need to draw to retain the Ashes obviously, but drawing the series because of washouts wouldn't be much of an achievement. The key issue is really whether or not England are good enough to win two or more test matches in Australia.

 

[vic_orthdox]

the return of Gillespie to some semblance of form

Gillespie's return to form... to the form that he was in just before the Ashes?

exposed for depth in the bowling department.

Considering how many bowlers they've lost, I don't think "exposed for depth" is really the right term. If Austrlia had similar injuries, I'd be very suprised if our back-up performed as well as what England's has.

 

[James]

Moved to the Ashes forum.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Gillespie's return to form... to the form that he was in just before the Ashes?

Obviously before he went to Yorkshire was what I meant. Good season for SA, and a solid return to test cricket. Certainly looked a far better bowler than he did during the Ashes. No idea how he's bowled in England as I haven't seen any of it.

Considering how many bowlers they've lost, I don't think "exposed for depth" is really the right term. If Austrlia had similar injuries, I'd be very suprised if our back-up performed as well as what England's has.

Well, after the Harmison, Hoggard, Flintoff, Jones attack that appeared in the Ashes, there hasn't been much else. Obviously the spin department looks fine with Panesar, but Anderson and Mahmood had one good test each, and Plunkett hasn't done much. Their backup bowlers haven't been utterly woeful or anything, but they haven't been good enough to beat the better teams around. Also, it may be that they have been stretched a great deal by injuries, but when the likes of Jones are almost never fit that's pretty much what you have to expect to be facing.

Australia's depth might not be any better, but it's unlikely that our entire frontline attack will be missing at any given time as England's has.

 

[marc71178]

Obviously before he went to Yorkshire was what I meant. Good season for SA, and a solid return to test cricket.

Remind us who the return was against...

 

[vic_orthdox]

Remind us who the return was against...

And it was hardly as though he had an amazing domestic season. If it weren't an ex-Test bowler, he wouldn't have gotten back into the side on the back of that performance.

Even when watching the ING games, he looked slightly better than the Ashes, but still not a world class bowler.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

And it was hardly as though he had an amazing domestic season. If it weren't an ex-Test bowler, he wouldn't have gotten back into the side on the back of that performance.

Even when watching the ING games, he looked slightly better than the Ashes, but still not a world class bowler.

Never said he looked world class, but he certainly looked better than he did in the Ashes, and averaged 20 odd for the season, which equates to "some semblance of form" in my mind, coupled with a pretty good couple of tests against Bangladesh. I don't know how he'll go in the Ashes if he plays, but it's clear that his career isn't over quite yet, which it certainly looked to be a year ago.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Remind us who the return was against...

Doesn't really matter. Fact is he outbowled the other seamers, and Warne for that matter, and he certainly wasn't doing that in the Ashes.

 

[tooextracool]

First Simon Jones is out for the series, Ash Giles is injured and now Vaughan;

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/ausveng/content/current/story/251829.html

I also think it's a matter of time before Freddie is injured with his workload.

So the question needs to be asked; will this year's series be a total fizzer? I must admit, I'm thinking it will be. Two of England's crucial successes in Ashes 2005 were in aggressive and skilfull old-ball bowling and excellent planning. Now, the two players most responsible for those are out. Couple this with England's struggles against SL and it's not a pretty picture.

What does everyone else think?

i must remind you that we are in the month of June, and the Ashes are all the way in November. Its quite plausible that anything can happen before then, England might unearth a champion player in the duration while Mcgrath or Warne may injure themselves during that period(and we all know how Australia plays without those 2). Of course it may still be almost a guarantee that Australia will win, but if and theres a big if the selectors pick the right players and give certain young players enough opportunities before then, theres definetly a possibility that England will at least compete.
For the first test against Pakistan i would pick a side similar to this one:
Marcus Trescothick
Alistair Cook
Mark Butcher
Kevin Pietersen
Ed Joyce/Owais Shah
Paul Collingwood
Chris Read
One more fast bowler whos name isnt Lewis, Plunkett or Mahmood
Matthew Hoggard
Steve Harmison
Monty Panesar

It is absolutely imperative that England figure out which of Cook, Joyce, Shah and Collingwood are test class and who they want to start during the Ashes by the end of this series.
I would give Strauss some time off so that he can work on his game as well as his temperament. I think Strauss and Pietersen have both gotten extremely complacent since the Ashes and seem to think that they can bat England out of any situation and its therefore ok for them to play any shot no matter what the situation. One of the major attributes that people including me highlighted about Strauss when he made his debut was that he had an excellent test match temperament, and at the moment this is no where to be found. Further he needs to work on his crooked bat technique that has cost him his wicket so many times.
Mark Butcher never deserved to be dropped, and since hes had a relatively good season for Surrey so far this year, i think his presence would provide some well needed experience to the England upper order.
As far as the Ashes is concerned, i think if Anderson bowls the way he did in Mumbai he is a worthy but not a like for like replacement for Jones. An attack of Hoggard, Harmison, Flintoff, Anderson would still be a fierce challenge for the Aussies if all these players bowl to the best of their abilities. More importantly it is vital that England come in with perfect plans for how to tackle Warne, Macgill, Mcgrath and Lee as well as players like Hussey. Also its even more important that the selectors stop bungling around with Flintoff and Strauss as captains and give it to Trescothick who has very recently mentioned that he will consider captaining England if they want him to. England may miss Jones, but Trescothick is not that much worse as a captain and the batting with Mark Butcher and Cook instead of Vaughan and Strauss is probably more formidable than the one that played in the last Ashes series.

 

[tooextracool]

Obviously the spin department looks fine with Panesar, but Anderson and Mahmood had one good test each, and Plunkett hasn't done much. Their backup bowlers haven't been utterly woeful or anything, but they haven't been good enough to beat the better teams around.

Anderson only played one test. As such he was far better than Plunkett and Mahmood have been at any point of their careers. I dont think anyone can argue that he was quite impressive, and the bowler of the game in the only chance that he got.

 

[aussie]

Obviously before he went to Yorkshire was what I meant. Good season for SA, and a solid return to test cricket. Certainly looked a far better bowler than he did during the Ashes. No idea how he's bowled in England as I haven't seen any of it.

Well unfortunately his returns for yorkshire in the CC have been relatively poor and if he doesn't really improve i'd expect Clark to start in front of him.

 

[Mister Wright]

Losing Jones & Vaughan is a big loss, but losing Giles will only be beneficial for England.

 

[tooextracool]

Losing Jones & Vaughan is a big loss, but losing Giles will only be beneficial for England.

Even if you were a complete lunatic and for some reason thought that Panesar was as good as Giles with the ball, even you cant deny that Giles' batting is much better than his and anyone else in the framework for the England side for the number 8 position.

 

[Mister Wright]

Even if you were a complete lunatic and for some reason thought that Panesar was as good as Giles with the ball, even you cant deny that Giles' batting is much better than his and anyone else in the framework for the England side for the number 8 position.

Screw the no. 8 batting position, in recent years unless you come to Australia with a world class spinner you are not going to be anything close to competitive. India are the only team that I can think of in recent years that have been competitive against Australia for the whole series and they came with two world class spinners in Kumble and Harbajhan.

England may have been able to get away with Giles filling in overs in England, but in Australia you need an attacking spinner, otherwise with pitch conditions and only quicks you are not going to have as big of an impact. Now, I haven't seen that much of Panesar, but from what I've heard, he's an attacking spinner - just what England will need in Australia.

Obviously you would like to have a decent no. 8 batsman, but it is more important for England to have an attacking spinner. I mean, Giles' record is worse than ordinary and he isn't exactly a bowling allrounder, but more of a handy tailender who holds up an end with the ball. Nothing more really.

 

[bumpuss]

Without wanting to tempt fate, I'm inclined to agree. While England were obviously the better team last year, you have to get the feeling when you look at results since that it was very much a good moment for England and a bad moment for Australia, and is unlikely to be repeated - at least not this year.

I'd also say that Australia have generally improved as a side since the Ashes, with the introduction of Hussey, the return of Gillespie to some semblance of form, the appearance of Stuart Clark and so on. Lee has come of age as a bowler in a huge way and is capable of leading an attack, Hayden has had a good season too, and Ponting is in the form of his life. England on the other hand haven't won a series, and have been torn apart by injuries and poor form, and exposed for depth in the bowling department. It'll take a monumental turnaround to win a series in Australia, given that nobody has done it in 14 years.

England in the last ashes series were only 'better' because of number dropped catches from the australian side. IT was ridiculuos how many catches the aussies, especially warney. Also i feel the english bowlers wont be as effective in australia as they were in England. Warney will only play better at home, and hussey back into the team should give depth. Though i hussey recently wasnt that good.

As for english spinners panesar or giles, they will have little impact. ITs the english batsman that need inflict damage. Australia will be deadly with macgill and warne, but cook should he could handle spin against India and i think he will need to perform for england to have chance.

 

[howardj]

The cornerstone to beating Australia is to contain Ponting and Hayden, and score 400 in your first innings. If England can do those two things (as they did in 2005) they should retain the Ashes. With Vaughan and Jones out, their chances of achieving the above are much reduced, but still realistic.