***Official*** Australia in England (The Ashes)

[FaaipDeOiad]

Flattish pitches could be in England's favour IMO. I back our batting and i think our 5 man attack has a better chance of lasting the series.

Why? Your batting hasn't looked particularly solid against Australias seamers to date, and McGrath and Warne are as good at getting wickets on flat pitches as anyone. And, Australia's batting has looked absolutely dominant so far on the flatter wickets, and shaky on the seamers.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

Flattish pitches could be in England's favour IMO. I back our batting and i think our 5 man attack has a better chance of lasting the series.

What are you on and can I have some please.

 

[JASON]

Here's My prediction- (All scientifically worked out based on probabilities, weather, player comfort etc. Based on complex Mathematical prediction Model !! )

20/20 - England.

Nat West Series - England 2-1(3 games v Australia)

Nat West challenge - Australia 3-0 ( 3 games)

Ashes - 5 Tests - 2-2 with a drawn Test !! Australia retain the Ashes !!

Anyway, my tips:

20/20: Australia
NWS: Australia 7-0, England 3-4, Bangladesh 0-6.
NWC: Australia 2-1
Ashes: Australia 3-1

Previous standings JASON 1 and 3/4 points, Faaip De Oiad 1/2 point

Nat West Challenge 2-1 !!
Congratulations Faaip De Oiad for predicting it spot on !!

Faaip De Oiad 1 point , JASON 1/2 point .

Current standings - JASON - 2 and 1/4 points, Faaip De Oiad 1 and 1/2 points !!

 

[luckyeddie]

Why? Your batting hasn't looked particularly solid against Australias seamers to date, and McGrath and Warne are as good at getting wickets on flat pitches as anyone. And, Australia's batting has looked absolutely dominant so far on the flatter wickets, and shaky on the seamers.

I agree. Time to get the hosepipes out, I reckon.

 

[howardj]

From what I saw of the ODI's, and taking account of the Lords pitch, I think England should bat Flintoff at 7, and play an extra batsman in the First Test. I can't see Giles picking up very many (if any) wickets at Lords, and if the ODI series has proven one thing, it is that the English top order can be very brittle.

 

[King_Ponting]

Flattish pitches could be in England's favour IMO. I back our batting and i think our 5 man attack has a better chance of lasting the series.

Sure your not talking from an australian perspective there? Casue to suggest that u would back the english batsman on that strip is an apsolute joke.

 

[greg]

Flatt-ish, not flat roads ;-)

 

[aussie]

Would England be that bad in having this team:

Trescothick
Strauss
Vaughan
Bell
Thorpe
Pietersen
Flintoff
Jones
Hoggard
Jones
Harmsion

 

[tooextracool]

Jones always has when he's not getting help

not sure where you get that from. if anything jones has generally wasted seaming conditions.

 

[tooextracool]

So well put. England really need to prepare a track much like the Headingley one the other day. One that their taller bowlers can exploit.

headingly, the track which all bar collingwood bowled poorly on?

 

[tooextracool]

i really think that if the ODI series has proved anything, the english bowlers bowled a lot better when they got the slowish wickets that they got in the first few games against australia. hoggard will probably get the ball to swing anyways, harmison is obviously more capable of exploting uneven bounce and is far more likely to bowl rubbish short balls on seaming wickets, flintoff is a fairly decent bowler in all conditions despite also being prone to bowling too short occasionally when the ball is moving about, giles becomes far more effective when theres a bit of turn & jones well he just needs accuracy and he'll be useful on most wickets.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

i really think that if the ODI series has proved anything, the english bowlers bowled a lot better when they got the slowish wickets that they got in the first few games against australia. hoggard will probably get the ball to swing anyways, harmison is obviously more capable of exploting uneven bounce and is far more likely to bowl rubbish short balls on seaming wickets, flintoff is a fairly decent bowler in all conditions despite also being prone to bowling too short occasionally when the ball is moving about, giles becomes far more effective when theres a bit of turn & jones well he just needs accuracy and he'll be useful on most wickets.

For me, Harmison looked most dangerous at Edgbaston and Lords, and Flintoff at Lords and Headingley. In fact, at Lords he was pretty much unplayable, and sent down one of the best spells of the series. Harmison as you say likes uneven bounce, but he also looked good when it was seaming at Lords. Jones will be much better when it's seaming, I think, and Hoggard obviously needs swing. Giles won't be a major factor in the tests, I don't think. The Australians will clearly target him, and if he's anything other than a 30+ average stock bowler I'll be shocked, and England need to be bowling Australia out regularly for sub-400 totals to win this series. The best bet, is a situation like Lords where they can get wicket which has some grass on it and seams a bit early on, and hopefully win the toss and send Australia in with it overcast and bowl them out for 250 or less.

What England definately don't want, is a flat wicket which breaks up and turns later in the match, like the last couple of ODI wickets. If there are five wickets like that and the weather stays good, Australia are quite capable of winning all the tests for mine. If it's seaming the whole way, it could go either way and though I'd still pick an Australian win I would expect it to be a close series.

 

[aussie]

nah Harmison best & most destructive spell was at Bristol

 

[wpdavid]

Would England be that bad in having this team:

Trescothick
Strauss
Vaughan
Bell
Thorpe
Pietersen
Flintoff
Jones
Hoggard
Jones
Harmsion

No, but Giles would be missed. From what we've seen so far, he should be able to tie up one end and allow the quicks to operate in short bursts. With that lineup, we're relying on Vaughan & Bell in the controlling role, which may be optimistic.
It's tricky though. Apart from Flintoff, none of the quicks are consistent enough to leave us 100% happy with only 3 of them plus Giles. OTOH the batting's looked so poor this summer and in SA that the insurance of an extra batsman is an attractive option. To be fair to the selectors, they're going to be crucified by someone whatever they do.

 

[aussie]

No, but Giles would be missed. From what we've seen so far, he should be able to tie up one end and allow the quicks to operate in short bursts. With that lineup, we're relying on Vaughan & Bell in the controlling role, which may be optimistic.
It's tricky though. Apart from Flintoff, none of the quicks are consistent enough to leave us 100% happy with only 3 of them plus Giles. OTOH the batting's looked so poor this summer and in SA that the insurance of an extra batsman is an attractive option. To be fair to the selectors, they're going to be crucified by someone whatever they do.

well its unlikely that the selectors will pick that team since Giles in their view is an extremely important member of the test side, but picking that team has you said is an attractive option.

 

[Barney Rubble]

Looks like Vaughanhas picked up a niggling injury too - here's a scenario. Both he and Pietersen are unavailable for the First Test. What's England's team? Butcher unfit, Key out of form etc. It'd be a big gamble, but I'd go for:

Trescothick
Strauss
Bell
Thorpe
Joyce
Flintoff
G Jones
Giles
Hoggard
S Jones
Harmison

Joyce looks a very good player.

 

[marc71178]

And what if Joyce then gets a ton - there'd be a real nightmare!

 

[PY]

Depends if you're a selector or not.

For us, it'd be brilliant. Imagine it, would be amazing and I'd miss it....

 

[BoyBrumby]

Has Joyce finished his qualification period? Thought it was at the end of August?

 

[vic_orthdox]

Once Joyce plays for England, is that it for him and Ireland?

It'd be good if they could make an exception (in the case that he's not in England's squad) for the 2007 World Cup, just to ensure that the Irish manage to be as competitive as possible.