Are Sri lanka capable of winning their next two test series ?

[iamdavid]

Clark gets bounce off a length. On Australian wickets, I really think some of the Sri Lankan batsmen will struggle with that. Sangakkara should be okay, as should Jayawardene and to a lesser extent Dilshan who is a good cutter of the ball. But Tharanga will just get owned, straight up, IMO, and Silva will struggle as well. Just too many holes.

I agree, the recent good results for Sri Lanka's batsman have come mainly in the Windies and the subcontinent and they are very different places to bat to Australia. Sangakarra, Jayawardene and Jayasuria have seen enough to know how to handle things, but I have serious doubts about the others and whether they will adjust quick enough because you can bet Clark will be right on the money and any trepidation or technical ifi-ness will be exposed.
Australia's attack certainly wont be as formidable as it has been for over a decade now, and if one or two of the middle order have big series they could really push Australia close (which I hope they do...because then it will be one hell of a series), but my gut tells me somethings likely to go wrong, remember australia havent lost a home series in 15 summers, it will take something very special not to make it 16.

As for them beating England, you certainly wouldnt bet against it, depends largely on the makeup of the England attack, how Monty and Flintoff go will be the real clincher I think, and whether England continue to handle Murali like a bunch of muppets.

 

[chaminda_00]

I honestly believe batsmen weren't pro-active enough against him. I'm not saying it is easy, but if somebody is just fiddling around then they are bound to get out.

Batsmen fiddle around with Vaas and co all the time. It doesn't mean your going to take wickets. You still have to bowl wicket taking deliveries on a regular basic.

 

[JASON]

The situation with Lee is that he should be fit for Twenty20 and near full fitness for Sri Lanka series, unless he gets injuried again.

How fast is he bowling though...It will be interesting to see how he fares in 20/20...I bet he has slowed down after his ankle injury...

 

[JASON]

The more I think about it ,I wish it was a 3 or 4 test series instead of just 2.

 

[Craig]

The more I think about it ,I wish it was a 3 or 4 test series instead of just 2.

Because three Test series with Sri Lanka and/or New Zealand isn't money making enough as the BCCI's lot

 

[Fiery]

Because three Test series with Sri Lanka and/or New Zealand isn't money making enough as the BCCI's lot

18,000 posts for Craigos! Fair effort mate. Well played

 

[pasag]

The more I think about it ,I wish it was a 3 or 4 test series instead of just 2.

Agreed and well done Craigos.

 

[sohummisra]

... but my gut tells me somethings likely to go wrong, remember australia havent lost a home series in 15 summers, it will take something very special not to make it 16.

The last time I recall it was close is when India toured. And the bowling line-up then, too, was missing Warnie and McGrath.

 

[Pup Clarke]

I'd like the Australians to go in with this X1...

Matthew Hayden
Michael Hussey
Ricky Ponting
Michael Clarke
Brad Hodge
Shane Watson
Adam Gilchrist
Brett Lee
Stuart Clark
Stuart MacGill
Shaun Tait

 

[pasag]

I'd like the Australians to go in with this X1...

Matthew Hayden
Michael Hussey
Ricky Ponting
Michael Clarke
Brad Hodge
Shane Watson
Adam Gilchrist
Brett Lee
Stuart Clark
Stuart MacGill
Shaun Tait

Yeah that's the most likely side, injury permitting.

 

[iamdavid]

The last time I recall it was close is when India toured. And the bowling line-up then, too, was missing Warnie and McGrath.

True, however that Indian side had two batsman in the form of their lives in Laxman and Dravid and Kumble was bowling superbly.
However on paper you'd have to think it isnt beyond the powers of Jayawardene, Sangakarra and Murali to match the efforts of those 3 in '04, and it is only a two test series so its not asthough they need to maintain it all summer, a big partnership and a couple of inspired spells is all it'd take.

Still, I just can't see it happening this year, the Australian attack this summer will be better than the one which faced India in '04 (which included Bracken and Williams who are not test bowlers, Bichel who was poorly managed and Lee who was not 100%fit) , this summer will see Clark who is established as a test class seamer, a more mature, dependable Lee and either Johnson, Tait or Hilfenhaus who all add something to the attack unlike Bracken or Williams.
Plus Sri Lanka dosent have the same depth in their batting that the Indians did in '04, Sehwag, Tendulkar and Ganguly all made major contributions along with the aforementioned pair during that series, now I'd just about bet my life that 5 Sri Lankans wont make hundreds this summer.

 

[iamdavid]

Yeah that's the most likely side, injury permitting.

No it's not, Symonds made 150 odd in his second last test and we all know how highly thought of he is within the Australian setup, injury permitting he's there for sure. And I'd be suprised if they moved Hussey up the order considering the succes he's had lower down and the security it gives the side if the top order should fail.
Also dont think they're likely to play Watson and Symonds in the same side as although Symonds did make that hundred at the MCG neither has completely proven himself as a test batsman, and given Symonds did make the hundred it means Watson will start on the sidelines, which is a shame because I reckon he's likely to be a better test player long term than Symo.
I also dont see Hodge getting back in there atleast at the very start of the summer, Id be suprised if they didnt hand the other batting spot to Phil Jaques to partner Hayden but it'll depend on early season PC form i spose, if Hodge, Rogers, Watson hell even someone like David Hussey set the world alight, they may get a look in.

likely -
1.M.Hayden
2.P.Jaques
3.R.Ponting*
4.M.Hussey
5.M.Clarke
6.A.Symonds
7.A.Gilchrist+
8.B.Lee
9.S.Clark
10.S.MacGill
11.S.Tait

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Symonds' century at the MCG was an awful hotch-potch of poor umpiring, good luck and inconsistant technique. Yes, he made the century but he was let off on at least two occasions for clear cut Lbw decisions by the woeful Koertsen (as I recall). It goes down in the record books, and Symo did well to concentrate for all that time (something wholly unexpected) but I would imagine that the Australian selectors will see that century as it was - a great slice of luck for the man. I doubt whether it would take much for Symonds to be dropped from the test team again.

 

[Fiery]

Symonds' century at the MCG was an awful hotch-potch of poor umpiring, good luck and inconsistant technique. Yes, he made the century but he was let off on at least two occasions for clear cut Lbw decisions by the woeful Koertsen (as I recall). It goes down in the record books, and Symo did well to concentrate for all that time (something wholly unexpected) but I would imagine that the Australian selectors will see that century as it was - a great slice of luck for the man. I doubt whether it would take much for Symonds to be dropped from the test team again.

And there it is! Congrats on the 1000 mate

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

And there it is! Congrats on the 1000 mate

And in that time I've mentioned myself 143 times
Bruno 18 times

and...

Fiery 18 times.

There you go Fiery. You're as popular with me as Bruno is...

Be afraid... be VERY afraid.

 

[pasag]

No it's not, Symonds made 150 odd in his second last test and we all know how highly thought of he is within the Australian setup, injury permitting he's there for sure. And I'd be suprised if they moved Hussey up the order considering the succes he's had lower down and the security it gives the side if the top order should fail.
Also dont think they're likely to play Watson and Symonds in the same side as although Symonds did make that hundred at the MCG neither has completely proven himself as a test batsman, and given Symonds did make the hundred it means Watson will start on the sidelines, which is a shame because I reckon he's likely to be a better test player long term than Symo.

Disagree really, both seem to be very highly valued in the selectors minds, but from what I've seen, Watson is rated much higher with regards to the future than Symonds and will get the nod if it comes down to the one or the other. Regardless of the MCG innings, I feel Watson will get the nod over Symonds, for the start of the summer at least unless the selectors go down the route of choosing them both, which may very well happen, unfortunately. Also the bowling will come into it quite abit in selectors minds, especially since we can't really get away with a fifth bowler as poor as Symonds anymore with the various retirements.

 

[Fiery]

And in that time I've mentioned myself 143 times
Bruno 18 times

and...

Fiery 18 times.

There you go Fiery. You're as popular with me as Bruno is...

Be afraid... be VERY afraid.

I am

 

[iamdavid]

Symonds' century at the MCG was an awful hotch-potch of poor umpiring, good luck and inconsistant technique. Yes, he made the century but he was let off on at least two occasions for clear cut Lbw decisions by the woeful Koertsen (as I recall). It goes down in the record books, and Symo did well to concentrate for all that time (something wholly unexpected) but I would imagine that the Australian selectors will see that century as it was - a great slice of luck for the man. I doubt whether it would take much for Symonds to be dropped from the test team again.

True, it was far from the most convincing of innings however the fact remains it was a hundred and it along with Hayden and Warne won the game.
And one of the fundamentals on which Australias dominance over the last 12 years has been built is consistency at the selection table, the way we handle our players and instill confidence in them is what sets us apart from England or Pakistan (although Brad Hodge would tell you otherwise ).

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

True, it was far from the most convincing of innings however the fact remains it was a hundred and it along with Hayden and Warne won the game.
And one of the fundamentals on which Australias dominance over the last 12 years has been built is consistency at the selection table, the way we handle our players and instill confidence in them is what sets us apart from England or Pakistan (although Brad Hodge would tell you otherwise ).

I can't disagree with any of the above, but to my mind not selecting Symonds will not be showing inconsistancy in selection as he was only really considered a stop-gap to fill the space of the retiring Martyn which would have been Watson's if he'd been fit. As I recall, the selectors had made it perfectly clear that Symonds was a horses-for-courses selection when they'd have preferred to select Watto.

I'd like to see a left-field selection and play Henriques. Ain't ever gonna happen though! (EDIT: I didn't mean that they should play Henriques at number six, mind... if that wasn't clear)

 

[Prince EWS]

True, it was far from the most convincing of innings however the fact remains it was a hundred and it along with Hayden and Warne won the game.
And one of the fundamentals on which Australias dominance over the last 12 years has been built is consistency at the selection table, the way we handle our players and instill confidence in them is what sets us apart from England or Pakistan (although Brad Hodge would tell you otherwise ).

Well then, consistency in Watson being picked ahead of Symonds when fit should reign supreme.