7 months away from the Ashes...

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

I hate to say it, but Sidebottom is no certainty. He's definitely a P due to his fitness problems and the fact that England's selectors sometimes don't seem keen to pick him (mind-boggingly).

Not sure about not seeming keen to pick him (not saying you're definately wrong there BTW as I've wondered about it once or twice myself) but there's no real hard solid evidence there yet.

I hope his fitness problems will be solved by then and obviously if he can cash-in on the weak WI batting (as he damn well should do) then his place would obviously be assured as long as his fitness held.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Durham_CCC

Sick of Cook getting out to silly shots, I think it would be worth a go opening with Shah in the Windies, and see how he does.

Would you prefer Bell to open ? I think they are both class players and both should be in the side IMO.

If Cook is to be dropped - and I'd not be against that BTW but you'd have to be very out-of-touch with the England management's thoughts to think it's remotely likely TBH - then the replacement has to be Robert Key, plain and simple. He's the only other person in the country right now who I think has a cat-in-hell's chance of success as a Test opener.

Certainly neither Bell nor Shah I see as any chance at all. If you want both of them in the side it has to be Shah at three and Bell at five\six. And Bell is trying my patience at the current time, he really is. I don't - unlike some - actually actively expect him to be dropped in West Indies, and frankly I think if he is the likely replacement is Michael Vaughan. Bell has had a very strong case to be dropped several times before now and it's only actually happened twice (both times in the subcontinent in 2005/06, and the first time he got back in without even missing a game anyway).

However, as I've said a good few times, Shah can rightly be spitting in rage that he's still yet to play a Test as a first-choice player.

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Benaud

england

1. maddy
2. compton
3. wagh
4. peterson
5. bell
6. dalrymple
7. gazzard
8. mascarenhas
9. munday
10. broad
11. dean

australia

1. hayden
2. langer
3. ponting
4. cosgrove
5. d. hussey
6. watson
7. hartley
8. henriques
9. krejza
10. lee
11. magoffin

That has to be the most without-a-common-theme set of XIs I've ever seen.

[Uppercut]

Originally Posted by Richard

Not sure about not seeming keen to pick him (not saying you're definately wrong there BTW as I've wondered about it once or twice myself) but there's no real hard solid evidence there yet.

I hope his fitness problems will be solved by then and obviously if he can cash-in on the weak WI batting (as he damn well should do) then his place would obviously be assured as long as his fitness held.

Still, hardly a certainty was my point. Although he's one player i'd say can genuinely trouble the Australians and it'd be a real shame if he doesn't play.

[Richard]

I think Sidebottom's a certainty provided fitness troubles (which are notable, have troubled him more than once but are not yet a constant recurring worry) are overcome. Stuart Clark is almost exactly the same, except he's elbow rather than intercostal-muscle.

Funny thing is Sidebottom's of late been kinda the opposite of Flintoff. Seemingly minimal effort for delivery and effortless in most of what he does with the ball, but with the ability to knock-over batsmen with fair aplomb and tailenders for fun.

Only once (Trent Bridge 2007) can I recall Sidebottom constantly making batsmen play-and-miss and never hitting the edge \ knocking the stumps over, whereas Flintoff's made a career of it the last 7 years.

If fit, I believe Sidebottom should and will be the first specialist bowler on the teamsheet and hopefully the combo of he and Flintoff (which has still played together just twice so far) could prove highly potent for just the reasons alluded to above about their polarised nature.

[pup11]

Originally Posted by Athlai

McGain anygood because Siddle and Krezja were ****ing atrocious in that last .

I have seen McGain bowl and he is pretty good given the current Aussie spin stocks, he has got very good accuracy for a leggie and gets good drift too, so he would my spinner for the Ashes series given he recovers from injury and shows some form for the Bushrangers later in the season.


If everything goes right form wise and injury wise then this the Aussie squad i would like to see for the Ashes

1.M.Hayden / P.Jaques / P.Hughes
2.S.Katich
3.R.Ponting (C)
4.M.Hussey
5.M.Clarke
6.A.Symonds
7.B.Haddin (wk)
8.M.Johnson
9.B.Lee
10.B.McGain
11.S.Clark
12.B.Hilfenhaus
13.D.Bollinger
14.S.Watson
15.J.Krejza / N.Hauritz

Ideally would like to see Haydos play till the Ashes but if he retires or is dropped, then i would prefer to have Jaques,but in case he isn't fit or is out of form then i would give the chance to young Philip Hughes, would add certain amount of X- factor to the side with his youthful exuberance and talent.

Otherwise won't tamper much with the batting line-up and would persist with the same crop of batsmen, bowling wise Lee, Clark and Johnson should be the three quicks and McGain would be the spinner, Hilfenhaus and Bollinger should be the reserve fast bowlers, and Watto would be cover for Symonds, and taking the second spinner depends on what the selectors think, because having 7 quicks in one squad won't make much sense, but in case they don't find a need for a second spinner they can pick a reserve batsmen, someone like Hodge or David Hussey who have some experience of playing in the English conditions due to their county stints.

[pup11]

Originally Posted by Richard

Australia's best bowler (Clark) is better than England's best (Flintoff) in more conditions than not. However, if England get the conditions right (and obviously a bit of it is down to luck as if the weather's bad you can't prepare with the attention-to-detail you'd like), Flintoff could easily be better than Clark.

England's second-best (Sidebottom) is potentially better than anything else Australia have to offer (be it Lee or Johnson). Lee and Johnson have both been poor very often but have also of times been devastating.

Anderson is similar to the above two Australians - often poor but potentially excellent and having demonstrated his excellence not so long ago.

The rest of the seamers who might play have so far done nothing to suggest they're any good at Test level - but that doesn't mean any of them won't be. Come July 2009, Tremlett and Bracken\Bollinger (or others) could be bowlers who can perform at Test level.

To make many assumptions about the spinners would be dangerous - we don't know how good Bryce McGain really is. He could be better than MSP or Swann - he's a wristspinner. However, he could also perfectly possibly be nowhere near as good under most circumstances. One thing's for sure, though, if McGain doesn't play, England >>>>>>>> Australia in spin and would be exceptionally unwise not to try to play to that strength.

I think your assesment when comparing bowling of both the sides is quite accurate, but i think that certain edge that the English bowlers have kind of gets blunted when you compare the batting of both the sides, Aussies bat pretty deep and unlike the English side there isn't any heavy dependence on a few certain individuals to click in order for Australia to score big runs.

[Richard]

Australia's depth of batting currently is envious, no doubts, but I'd still hope Flintoff and Sidebottom could knock-over the Lees, Johnsons and whoever-else-is-playing-with-any-batting-ability's without great difficulty when the ball is swinging.

[Manee]

Definately not, imo, the Australian tail is far from the ability of someone you can knock over with consistency.

[Richard]

None of them are top-order batsmen. Really good bowlers can expect to knock-over players who are not top-order batsmen with great regularity.

[Uppercut]

Originally Posted by Richard

None of them are top-order batsmen. Really good bowlers can expect to knock-over players who are not top-order batsmen with great regularity.

Flintoff doesn't though. Sidebottom won't if the ball doesn't swing. Noone else in England is a "really good bowler", South Africa are having real trouble with the Aussie tail and England's attack isn't a great deal better than SA's, if at all.

[Penguinissimo]

Sorry to have posted and then dropped out of the discussion.

If I had to pick an England XI now, it would be:

Strauss
Cook
Vaughan (because I will kill someone if Bell plays, and Shah is dodgy in English conditions)
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff
Prior
Broad (because if you're going to bat Flintoff at 6 you need some back-up down the order)
Swann (because Monty needs a season back in county cricket to sort his game out)
Harmison (because in a five man attack you can afford an X factor bowler)
Anderson (to be replaced by Sidebottom if he can prove his fitness)

[Jigga988]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

Flintoff doesn't though. Sidebottom won't if the ball doesn't swing. Noone else in England is a "really good bowler", South Africa are having real trouble with the Aussie tail and England's attack isn't a great deal better than SA's, if at all.

yup, exactly, yorkers that Flintoff may bowl arn't really that effective and if there is no swing then Sidebottom and Jimmy would find it quite difficult to dislodge competent batsman such as Johnson and Lee and even Clark can bat a bit, dunno about the spinner though

[Jigga988]

Originally Posted by Penguinissimo

Sorry to have posted and then dropped out of the discussion.If I had to pick an England XI now, it would be:StraussCookVaughan (because I will kill someone if Bell plays, and Shah is dodgy in English conditions)PietersenCollingwoodFlintoffPriorBroad (because if you're going to bat Flintoff at 6 you need some back-up down the order)Swann (because Monty needs a season back in county cricket to sort his game out)Harmison (because in a five man attack you can afford an X factor bowler)Anderson (to be replaced by Sidebottom if he can prove his fitness)

yeah i like Vaughan in the squad, he's a proven batsman in English conditions and i am sure he will be really fired up for the ashes. Also, he'll help out Pietersen who looked like an inexperienced captain in that first test against India.

[pup11]

Originally Posted by Penguinissimo

Sorry to have posted and then dropped out of the discussion.

If I had to pick an England XI now, it would be:

Strauss
Cook
Vaughan (because I will kill someone if Bell plays, and Shah is dodgy in English conditions)
Pietersen
Collingwood
Flintoff
Prior
Broad (because if you're going to bat Flintoff at 6 you need some back-up down the order)
Swann (because Monty needs a season back in county cricket to sort his game out)
Harmison (because in a five man attack you can afford an X factor bowler)
Anderson (to be replaced by Sidebottom if he can prove his fitness)

I think its time to move on and look somewhere else, going back to Vaughan would be like taking a few steps backwards and even if Vaughan were to be brought back into the side, it should be on the basis of him scoring some runs and showing good form in county cricket rather than just bring him back without any real reason, i think English selectors need to decide what they want to do with Bell, they have invested a lot of time and games in him, and now to just drop him before an important series like the Ashes would be a very hard decision, but the good thing for him and most English batsmen is that they get to play a lot of tests against the Windies before the Ashes, so it could be fill your boots time for all the batsmen who have been out of form and who have their spots under the scanner.


Prior is another guy the English selectors need to make up their mind about, he is certainly proved that he can hold his own when compared to the other keeper-batsmen in UK in terms of batting and he is arguably the best batsmen among all keepers in England currently, but what they need to decide is are they willing to ignore Prior' shoddy glovework just for his batting and is his batting really that good for them to take this risk, it would be very harsh on the English bowlers if they work hard and make a Ponting, Hussey or Clarke edge one only to see Prior spill the chance and later seeing the same batsman going onto make most of that let off, i personally believe Read is the best wicket-keeper in England and he should be persisted with or they could go for Foster, but Read would be my choice.

Other than that i agree with the rest of the names in there, Monty needs to dropped he needs to go back and work on his bowling all over again, but i doubt that would happen because if they can pick Giles over Panesar during the last Ashes series in Australia, then Panesar too might just be able to secure his spot till the upcoming Ashes series, on the other hand Swann has really impressed me his with changes in pace, loop and overall style of bowling and he is someone England should persist with for the upcoming series against West Indies and see where it goes from there.

EDIT: Just noticed that you don't have Sidebottom in there, tbh he would the first English bowler i would pick if he is fit.