Do England have a good enough team to win the Ashes next year ?

[superkingdave]

Don't see Australia in general or Jaques being overwhelmed or falling apart, they're far too good for that.

I think it's silly to make any presumptions about participants - Casson especially - as with any luck for all concerned poor performers will have been axed by then. Certainly there's no way Casson should play, hopefully he might be a one-Test wonder. So, so fortunate to get picked for this game ahead of McGain ITFP.

Have you even seen McGain bowl Richard?

(not arguing the suggestion that Casson is fortunate to be playing in front of McGain, just wondering on what basis you believe this?)

 

[Richard]

Nice little out you're setting up there - if he gets rolled it's coz he can't handle good bowling, but if he's prodigious you'll be able to say "oh well, the standard wasn't up to 05, the bowling was poor and that's why he made so many runs".

Well... yeah, obviously.

 

[Richard]

Have you even seen McGain bowl Richard?

(not arguing the suggestion that Casson is fortunate to be playing in front of McGain, just wondering on what basis you believe this?)

The fact McGain did a bit of some note last (Aus) season and Casson has done nothing apart from have something like 3-and-a-half reasonable (and no more than reasonable) games at the end of last season after being utterly woeful, not even good enough for either WA or NSW's first-teams, for ages.

 

[Richard]

Missed the point; that a catch actually went to short cover was a bonus. He was just there to get in Hayden's eyeline to induce tentative prods which, as you nicely pointed out, result in nicks behind, which there were plenty of, but not that many went to hand. He was bowled more often than any other dismissal I reckon; I can remember twice at Lords, dragged on to Freddie and around his legs later in the series. The tentative shots which resulted in those dismissals you could put down to the short-cover too; it rarely is a genuine catching position for quick bowlers.

He was bowled by Hoggard at Lord's, with the inswinger from over-the-wicket (mostly he tends to get lbw to those sorts of deliveries, but no matter - bowled is just the same), then said drag-on you mention in the second-innings, then the around-the-pads one in the second-innings at Old Trafford.

I don't really think you can put a bottom-edged pull down to the short-cover (it was simply the uneven bounce), and well, I think it's pretty tenuous to put walking accross your stumps down to it too.

And as you know, I don't think the lbw and bowled to inswingers had a thing to do with said short-covers, simply the weakness in his game that's always been there.

 

[superkingdave]

The fact McGain did a bit of some note last (Aus) season and Casson has done nothing apart from have something like 3-and-a-half reasonable (and no more than reasonable) games at the end of last season after being utterly woeful, not even good enough for either WA or NSW's first-teams, for ages.

Last season being pretty much all of Bryce McGain's FC career...thought you were against picking people on the basis of one good season? And it wasn't as if McGain's season was any better than reasonable anyway.

 

[Prince EWS]

Last season being pretty much all of Bryce McGain's FC career...thought you were against picking people on the basis of one good season? And it wasn't as if McGain's season was any better than reasonable anyway.

Ideally, McGain wouldn't be picked based on one good season. However, you have to pick someone. One decent season > one semi-decent season and a collection of very poor ones. And obviously, one decent season > no decent seasons. They are the options presenting themselves to the Australian selectors in terms of spinners.

Really, I don't think a spinner should play for Australia at the moment unless the conditions suit him to a ridiculous degree, but it's always wise to have one in the squad. Even though McGain is far from ideal, he's closer than Casson, Cullen, Bailey, Heal or anyone else you'd like to name.

 

[superkingdave]

Well 29 wickets @ 35.1 vs 38 wickets @ 34.8, massive difference between the two obviously... added to the fact the two faced each other in two of their last 4 FC matches and Casson did better in those...i don't see how Richard can say that Casson was very very lucky to play ahead of Mcgain given he's never even seen Mcgain bowl

 

[Richard]

Because Casson has never even done that.

 

[Top_Cat]

He was bowled by Hoggard at Lord's, with the inswinger from over-the-wicket (mostly he tends to get lbw to those sorts of deliveries, but no matter - bowled is just the same), then said drag-on you mention in the second-innings, then the around-the-pads one in the second-innings at Old Trafford.

I don't really think you can put a bottom-edged pull down to the short-cover (it was simply the uneven bounce), and well, I think it's pretty tenuous to put walking accross your stumps down to it too.

And as you know, I don't think the lbw and bowled to inswingers had a thing to do with said short-covers, simply the weakness in his game that's always been there.

Which was exacerbated by the pressure of having the short-cover under his nose...... Like i said, it's not really a catching position to a quick; why else would you put him there other than to get up the batsman's nose then?

 

[Richard]

I don't know. I wouldn't have done it myself, I'd have had the fielder somewhere where he could take catches and\or stop runs.

Mind, short covers do stop batsmen pushing and running (which Hayden, and the rest of the Australian order, do like to do - as does any batsman with much sense) so it's not a completely useless position after all.

 

[superkingdave]

Because Casson has never even done that.

Don't understand this post, Casson has never even done what? His season was near identical to McGain's 'decent' season with a few less wickets, but finishing the season better than McGain and doing better than him when they played against each other...

 

[Top_Cat]

I don't know. I wouldn't have done it myself, I'd have had the fielder somewhere where he could take catches and\or stop runs.

Mind, short covers do stop batsmen pushing and running (which Hayden, and the rest of the Australian order, do like to do - as does any batsman with much sense) so it's not a completely useless position after all.

Short cover does, sure, but it wasn't really an orthodox short-cover; was far straighter and closer, almost next to the non-striker. It's not going to stop the chip-and-run. Sometimes, fielders serve no other purpose than to get in the batsman's eye-line. I do it all the time in indoor cricket and it's hardly an exotic tactic; I get right up close standing right next to the pitch, without making any extra noise or movements and it's amazing how, almost instantly, batsmen suddenly feel crowded and are either late on the ball or try to hit out and give some easy catches. Then when the batsman, who was probably hitting the ball well beforehand, misses s swipe outside off-stump, you have to follow-up with the exaggerated "Oooooo!" and associated stuff.

It's the mental aspect of the game which you can't really do without if you're going to play at a reasonable level. Stuff like moving a fielder 2 metres to the left then two metres to the right or walking up to a fielder just out of earshot of the batsman and saying "I've got nothing to say to you.......but the batsman doesn't know that." Prima facie useless tactics but they play on the mind of the batsman because they often create a chance for a wicket where just putting fielders in the batsman's weak spots hasn't worked.

 

[vic_orthdox]

In my first season of First Grade cricket, I was placed in a super short cover for the opening batsmen. There was a bit in the pitch. I had a ball smashed at me and dropped it, was pretty shattered. Captain came up and said, "Doesn't matter, you weren't there for the catch. We just want to get him driving, so we bring you in close to further entice it. Maybe make him hit it a bit harder, because once he gets it past you there's a boundary for the taking."

Working on much the same level, especially with an ego driven player which is what Hayden can tend to be

 

[Top_Cat]

In my first season of First Grade cricket, I was placed in a super short cover for the opening batsmen. There was a bit in the pitch. I had a ball smashed at me and dropped it, was pretty shattered. Captain came up and said, "Doesn't matter, you weren't there for the catch. We just want to get him driving, so we bring you in close to further entice it. Maybe make him hit it a bit harder, because once he gets it past you there's a boundary for the taking."

Working on much the same level, especially with an ego driven player which is what Hayden can tend to be

Harsh for your first season! No doubt they were testing your nads too.

 

[Laurrz]

ahhhh just watched the 2005 Ashes highlights randomly.. love it

man i cant wait to see how Fraz goes, he so often 'wobbles' the ball a little bit both ways.. Chappell calls it the wobblers
so will be frothing at the mouth watching him in England (if anyone remembers his test series debut in RSA)

Lee will be obviously excellent unless a massive form drop, Symonds medium pacers are quite handy in conditions helping him....which leaves just one more quick... Midge/Noffers/Bollinger its up for the taking

 

[Richard]

Short cover does, sure, but it wasn't really an orthodox short-cover; was far straighter and closer, almost next to the non-striker. It's not going to stop the chip-and-run. Sometimes, fielders serve no other purpose than to get in the batsman's eye-line. I do it all the time in indoor cricket and it's hardly an exotic tactic; I get right up close standing right next to the pitch, without making any extra noise or movements and it's amazing how, almost instantly, batsmen suddenly feel crowded and are either late on the ball or try to hit out and give some easy catches. Then when the batsman, who was probably hitting the ball well beforehand, misses s swipe outside off-stump, you have to follow-up with the exaggerated "Oooooo!" and associated stuff.

It's the mental aspect of the game which you can't really do without if you're going to play at a reasonable level. Stuff like moving a fielder 2 metres to the left then two metres to the right or walking up to a fielder just out of earshot of the batsman and saying "I've got nothing to say to you.......but the batsman doesn't know that." Prima facie useless tactics but they play on the mind of the batsman because they often create a chance for a wicket where just putting fielders in the batsman's weak spots hasn't worked.

All grand stuff. Personally, though, I'll take putting fielders where they'll field (and ideally catch) balls.

Obviously doing stuff like going to talk to a fielder to say nothing doesn't do your chances any harm (though it does slow the over-rate utterly needlessly mind) but I don't want to waste a fielder just for the sake of trying some mind-games that probably work about 1 in 20 occasions, if that.

 

[Richard]

...

Is this perminant this time?

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Is this perminant this time?

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/showthread.php?t=38663&page=3

 

[Richard]

My guess is duplicate accounts. Bond21 = Morgieb?

I mean, I know dear old morgie has been rather more of a nuscience than most, but surely Heath you know they've been around for long enough now (morgieb has already been banned on about 6 duplicate-accounts BTW, and his main one for about 6 months) for that to be a no-way?

 

[Ikki]

Yes but since he is part of the Australian batting card i dont see why he shouldnt be included. I suggested that the Australian batting is precarious because they have unproven players like Jaques, Symonds and Haddin. They might all end up being good players but the point is that there are holes to exploit at the moment.

Mate, if those are our holes then I feel comfy with the 'holes' plus the ones I mentioned.

I'm not the type to brag or to predict things so extensively with regards to Australia playing other sides. We'll see what unfolds next year.