Team Of The Ashes

[social]

Team that didnt perform up to expectations

1. Hayden
2. Vaughan
3. Ponting (c)
4. Bell
5. Martyn
6. Katich
7. Gilchrist
8. Lee
9. Gillespie
10. Kasprowiscz
11. MacGill

Selectors - Aus

Vaughan's captaincy was excellent but his batting was below par. If Aus had held their catches at Edgbaston, his returns would have been dismal.

Ponting's batting and captaincy were largely poor.

MacGill performed far worse than expectations, he didnt perform at all.

I didnt select either Geraint or Giles because they both performed in line with my pre-series assessment of them as players - poor

Aus selectors:-

1. award Michael Lewis a central contract but place Clarke on standby instead thereby announcing to the world that Lewis is not good enough

2. select Hodge to tour but obviously dont consider him to be good enough to play test cricket as main batsmen all fail repeatedly yet he is never given a chance

3. see Warne expose Eng's weakness to spin for the zillionth time but ignore world-class MacGill in favour of hopelessly out of form or untried seamers

4. Ignore form book and keep under-performers in side in name of loyalty

 

[jlo33692]

Ok then at a push,i would have to go with Threscothic ,Biased ?maybe!! But if i was a selector i would have to take into account the quality of the bowling that each faced.We cant really just go on the averages of each opener IMO. If you compare what Justin had to endure, Flintoff,Hoggard,Harmmo x ,jones,as opposed to Gillesp,Kaspa,Mcgarth,then lee and taite at the end i would have to ask ,do you think the English openers would have performed better aginst thier own attack?
I think that has to be taken into consideration when working out the best players.So Threso gets in the bad squad,and jones goes still as the keeper which seems unfair as he and gilly were both pretty poor,so neither should get into best team,Actually i will say gilly was worst as he had big wrapps comming in and he had his poorest series EVER,so i now go with
Hayden
Thresc
bell
martyn
katich
gilly
collo
gillesspi
giles
Kaspa
tait
with appologies to Threscot,

 

[jlo33692]

Team that didnt perform up to expectations

1. Hayden
2. Vaughan
3. Ponting (c)
4. Bell
5. Martyn
6. Katich
7. Gilchrist
8. Lee
9. Gillespie
10. Kasprowiscz
11. MacGill

Selectors - Aus

Vaughan's captaincy was excellent but his batting was below par. If Aus had held their catches at Edgbaston, his returns would have been dismal.

Ponting's batting and captaincy were largely poor.

MacGill performed far worse than expectations, he didnt perform at all.

I didnt select either Geraint or Giles because they both performed in line with my pre-series assessment of them as players - poor

Aus selectors:-

1. award Michael Lewis a central contract but place Clarke on standby instead thereby announcing to the world that Lewis is not good enough

2. select Hodge to tour but obviously dont consider him to be good enough to play test cricket as main batsmen all fail repeatedly yet he is never given a chance

3. see Warne expose Eng's weakness to spin for the zillionth time but ignore world-class MacGill in favour of hopelessly out of form or untried seamers

4. Ignore form book and keep under-performers in side in name of loyalty

you make some good points SOCIAL.
Who and when would you have changed the team differntly from selectors?
I am agreeing with you on most points but curious to know ,who and when they would have replacedwho and when?

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Ok then at a push,i would have to go with Threscothic ,Biased ?maybe!! But if i was a selector i would have to take into account the quality of the bowling that each faced.We cant really just go on the averages of each opener IMO.

So Trescothick plays well and largely looks to be coping with the Australian bowling, whilst Strauss looks largely at sea, yet Trescothick gets the nod here? Justification please.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Team that didnt perform up to expectations

1. Hayden
2. Vaughan
3. Ponting (c)
4. Bell
5. Martyn
6. Katich
7. Gilchrist
8. Lee
9. Gillespie
10. Kasprowiscz
11. MacGill

MacGill didn't get a chance to perfrom or not. The expectations for MacGill didn't come to pass, but it was he that didn't perform.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

I dont see how Lee would even figure in the conversation. He averaged over 40 AGAIN this series.

Harmison bowled with the same new ball in the same conditions as Hoggard this series, so I dont see how Hoggard's job is any easier...[/QUOT

Pick Harmy, he's far more dangerous.

Hoggard was the worthier bowler for my money. Look at when he took his wickets. He stepped up in the clutch. Harmison needs to get his length sorted.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

6. PD Collingwood

Collingwood was picked to add depth to the batting. He played a crucial role by just being at the crease on the 5th day. He wasn't needed to score runs per se, but rather to be there with Pietersen. He did just that.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Imagine if McGrath had the benefit of the same - his career average would be nudging single figures.

Speaks wonders for the strength of the Aussie bowling attack...

 

[jlo33692]

If you compare what Justin had to endure, Flintoff,Hoggard,Harmmo x ,jones,as opposed to Gillesp,Kaspa,Mcgarth,then lee and taite at the end i would have to ask ,do you think the English openers would have performed better aginst thier own attack?
I think that has to be taken into consideration when working out the best players.So Threso gets in the ba

d squad[

Justification is that i had to pick someone and i feel whoever i picked i would get the same question you posed. I know Aus rate strauss as the more complete batsman of the 2,Tresco was Mcgrath bunnie for a while ,but when McGrath was injured Thres comeinto his own. IMO

 

[nick-o]

would this be a fair side of a team that did not perform as well as expected? I still need one more player but fair to say not one of these would be picked in anyones side,i suppose the allrounder would be collingwood in this team but he only had 1 test,but anyway the point is it is dominated by aussies,i think that says a lot more than needs saying,can anybody find someone(anyone to replace anyone here?

Hayden
Gilchrist
Bell
Marytn
Katich
Jones
Gillesspi
Kasprowich
Giles
Taite

One name there is totally wrong.

Ashley Giles performed much, much better than expected -- remember how anyone who got out to him has to go hang themselves? And he got'em all, then scored the winning runs in the decisive test, and then hit fifty today to make it safe.

He ain't Shane Warne, but he performed his role better than anyone could've expected -- if anyone out-performed expectation, it's the King of Spain.

 

[jlo33692]

Mr Mxyzptlk.
Could we please have your team?
best and worst?

 

[jlo33692]

One name there is totally wrong.

Ashley Giles performed much, much better than expected -- remember how anyone who got out to him has to go hang themselves? And he got'em all, then scored the winning runs in the decisive test, and then hit fifty today to make it safe.

He ain't Shane Warne, but he performed his role better than anyone could've expected -- if anyone out-performed expectation, it's the King of Spain.

Yeah nicko but only 1 spinner in the team m8,we are selecting the positions which is just as hard as the best,actually its bloody harder. Maybe you believe that giles should be in ahead of warney?

 

[nick-o]

Hi jl-o

You didn't label your team best and worst; you called it "a team that did not perform as well as expected"

Of course Warne is a better spinner than Gil-o; but if you were to come up with some numerical value of "performed better than expected" Gil-o's score would exceed Warne's, simply because no one expected him to do anything.

 

[jlo33692]

Yep your right m8 i realised that when i read back when i posted.

Your dead right,i think i got thrown off when i was told i couldnt have gillchrist opening and had to pick one keeper.But if you pick your team of non performers then place them in some form of a batting order then thats what i would have.
Giles played way beyong expectations of everyone and from all reports from the aussie blokes it couldnt happen to a better bloke. I heard a bloke on the radio here in oz saying that oz were to friendly witht the england players,therefor nulifying the invincability they had. He thought that by being friendly towards the eng boys they then could not go out with the same venom and swagger.I like to think differently that these guys are proffesionals and they will fight to the death to win but this is what seperates cricket from most sports,it is and should always be a gentlemans game.Cricket can only win by the 2 countries being freindly,i am certain that no player would try less just because they had a m8 in english side. It is good for the game and it will filter into junior cricket just as sledging used to.

 

[social]

you make some good points SOCIAL.
Who and when would you have changed the team differntly from selectors?
I am agreeing with you on most points but curious to know ,who and when they would have replacedwho and when?

Symonds/Watson and MacGill should have been in the team from the second test onwards.

Given how obviously out of form they were, it was absolute suicide to play Kaspa and Gillespie in the same side and as 2 of only 4 bowlers.

Despite his superb innings at the Oval, Hayden should have been dropped 2 tests earlier and replaced by either Katich or Hussey.

I would also have dropped Martyn for the Oval and replaced him with Symonds/Watson. Running Ponting out and then throwing his own wicket away shortly thereafter basically handed Eng the match at Trent Bridge.

Unfortunately, without McGrath, the team needs 5 bowlers and our selectors got it horribly wrong.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Best:

JL Langer - lots of guts and heart.
ME Trescothick - looked generally more at ease than Strauss.
MP Vaughan (C) - brilliant captaincy and one crucial knock.
KP Pietersen - topscored amidst the Lords carnage, helped swing the momentum in the 2nd Test, played THE innings at the Oval.
MJ Clarke - looked better than most Aussie batsmen.
A Flintoff - player of the series.
GO Jones (wk) - by default, though he played one really important knock.
SK Warne - is he even human?
MJ Hoggard - bowled two crucial spells.
SP Jones - THE bowler for England IMO - he defined England's competitive streak.
GD McGrath - legend.

Worst:

ML Hayden - woeful to say the least.
AJ Strauss - by default.
RT Ponting - terrible captaincy and a shadow of his best with the bat.
DR Martyn - a couple of tough calls, but he never looked in touch.
IR Bell - two very good innings at crucial stages, but too often at sea.
SM Katich - by default really, as I think he looked better than most Aussie batsmen.
AC Gilchrist (wk) - unheard-of lack of performance.
JN Gillespie - true effort, but looked less than County standard.
B Lee - by default - I was actually really impressive with the spirit, heart and effort that Lee put in throughout the series. It's a shame he didn't get just rewards.
MS Kasprowicz - see Gillespie.
SJ Harmison - averaged 42.16 after the Lord's first innings and he rarely looked any better than that average.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

My Ashes team

Marcus Trescothick
Justin Langer
Ricky Ponting
Michael Vaughan
Kevin Pietersen (only marginally ahead of Clarke in my opinion, if he'd been held on one of his three chances at The Oval Clarke would get it)
Andrew Flintoff
Adam Gilchrist (batting was poorer than Jones, but not by very much, and his keeping was vastly superior)
Shane Warne
Matthew Hoggard (this is incredibly marginal for me, and I'm inclined to pick Lee, but Hoggard's record was superior so Lee misses out)
Simon Jones
Glenn McGrath

This all reminds me that I better get started on my Ashes review.

 

[Prince EWS]

Collingwood was picked to add depth to the batting. He played a crucial role by just being at the crease on the 5th day. He wasn't needed to score runs per se, but rather to be there with Pietersen. He did just that.

I agree, but there was no-one else to put there. I couldnt just field a side with ten men.

 

[marc71178]

not underating hoggy's bowling performance but i think you have to look beyond that with their respective batting & lee has done better with the bat so i'd have him over hoggard.

And ignore the fact that he took 20 wickets @ 41!

 

[marc71178]

Also Gilly is a player who could demolish a side quickly.

But if it's based on this series, that is irrelevant.