England 17-man squad

[Richard]

Shame there is no Woakes or Trott in the Lions squads, but I guess they'll play for Warwickshire against England so the selectors should get a decent look.

Woakes has been dreadful this season - last thing he needs is an A-team call now.

 

[Richard]

Anyway, what happens if Oz wins the toss, bats and strolls to 500+ against a spin-heavy attack that struggles in unfavourable conditions?

Same thing, in all honesty, that happens if they win (or lose) the toss, bat and stroll to 500+ against a seam-heavy attack that struggles in unfavourable conditions.

Purely and simply, we need to assess conditions at the stadium before we decide what attack to pick. Even if they're spin-friendly I'd still be fairly reluctant to pick more than one; if they're not especially spin-friendly (which is far from OOTQ, as some seem not to realise) the idea should be unequivocally dismissed.

 

[Richard]

mate try being an england supporter. we abjectly surrenderd 5 nil to your lot!

At least we then went home and thrashed the mighty West Indies three-nil (would've been a four-nil whitewash but for rain) and had just previously thrashed the mightily injury-decimated Pakistan two-nil (I refuse to acknowledge the Fourth Test forfeiture as a genuine England win, but England emphatically had the better of the First Test anyway even if they never really looked like winning it).

In 2006/07 England could take comfort from being a mediocre mid-table side; in 1986/87 both England and Australia had recently been outplayed by India at home (England lost two-nil; Australia were saved from doing likewise by lost play), and India subsequently went 15 years without winning a single Test outside the subcontinent. They had also both just been beaten by New Zealand at home and were both in the throes of a lengthy period where West Indies comprehensively thrashed them every time their paths crossed. Oh, and both lost in Pakistan a year later as well; England lost at home too.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Rashid bowls with a lot of sidespin, similar to that of Danish Kaneria, which means that hes not likely to get that much turn but he seems to be quite efficient at using drift.

Eh?. Imparting sidespin on the ball = the ball will spin more than often.

 

[Richard]

Guessing tec meant topspin when he said sidespin, but you never know.

Rashid has certainly never yet struck me as a particularly big spinner of the ball, a la Mushtaq Ahmed. Much more Danish Kaneria esque - and Kaneria has always disappointed me all career in not spinning the ball more.

 

[Howsie]

Guessing tec meant topspin when he said sidespin, but you never know.

Rashid has certainly never yet struck me as a particularly big spinner of the ball, a la Mushtaq Ahmed. Much more Danish Kaneria esque - and Kaneria has always disappointed me all career in not spinning the ball more.

From the very little I've seen of Rashid I still think he gets more spin then Kaneria. In saying that though I don't want to see Rashid at all during the Ashes series, the Aussie's might not be playing spinners that well at the moment but I could so see them destroying young Rashid. For me Rashid bowls way too many bad balls to be playing test cricket at the moment.

 

[tooextracool]

Eh?. Imparting sidespin on the ball = the ball will spin more than often.

Sorry, as has been said, I meant top spin.

 

[tooextracool]

From the very little I've seen of Rashid I still think he gets more spin then Kaneria.

Yes he does, hes more in the mould of his mentor Mushtaq Ahmad than Kaneria tbh.

 

[aussie]

Not really, Rashid took 65 wickets last season at 31 a piece. Not brilliant of course, but hes universally regarded as the 2nd best spinner in England after Swann and hes only 21 at that. Whilst Rashid should not have played in the t20 world cup, I quite like the look of him for test match cricket, he certainly seems to have modelled himself on Mushtaq Ahmed or perhaps Mushtaq has had a major influence on him lately, but either way he looks to have some serious potential and thats why he is in the Ashes squad. Being one of the best spinners in the country of course means that if a game is going to be played on a turner against a team that traditionally have not favored spin, on a pitch such as Cardiff where such a possibility is evident that Adil Rashid is always going to be in the frame for selection.

All this is true. But its clear his performance on the big stage in the T20 WC, propelled him into this 17-man squad. If he didn't play at most he would have been in the lions squad. Thats clear.

As far as Sidebottom is concerned, I dont see how bowling 4 over spells in a handful of games at high pace is supposed to prove that Sidebottom is both fully fit to survive an entire test match or that hes good enough as a test match bowler.

Its the same way Flintoff would have been rushed back into the side.

Or what AUS are doing with Lee ATM.

Fact is before his injury woes Sidebottom was one of ENG best test bowler for the last 18 months. He must go right back into the side.

Which is? Destroy the 2 poorest batting sides in the world? Sorry Sidebottom hasnt proven anything which Onions hasnt.

Come on mayn, it was pretty much the same batsmen Anderson was bowling to & its pretty unanimously felt that Jimmy is ENG best bowlers ATM.

The windies team Onions knocked down just looked awful. I dont know if they struggled to acclimatise quickly enough, exposed technically or both. But it clearly wasn't the same WI team that should all the fact down in the caribbean.

So as i said before his performances reminded me of Richard Johnson & young Anderson vs ZIM 03 going into the test matches vs SA.

Sidebottom needs to go back to couty cricket and prove himself first before he can stake a claim for a test spot and Onions has earned is so whether or not you think Onions is good enough or not, there is absolutely no reason to drop him at this point in time.

Sidebottom gives the bowling attack more variety. The role Onions MAY play Braod could do.

As far as my own opinion of Onions goes, I will reserve my judgement until I've seen a little bit more of him, but from what I have seen I have been impressed.

I rate Onions. He definately has a future in the ENG set-up - he looks like one of those bowlers who is just always at you & one a captain could probably pick to bowl long spells to keep the runs down.

To date though is see no evidence that he will be penetrative enough. I honestly have more faith in Harmison being more dangerous than him in these conditions (presuming he Harmo of the Oval vs SA 08 returns) ATM.

 

[Scaly piscine]

From the very little I've seen of Rashid I still think he gets more spin then Kaneria. In saying that though I don't want to see Rashid at all during the Ashes series, the Aussie's might not be playing spinners that well at the moment but I could so see them destroying young Rashid. For me Rashid bowls way too many bad balls to be playing test cricket at the moment.

The thing is Rashid isn't going to be picked as a main/primary bowler. England will almost certainly pick 5 bowlers if Flintoff is fit (probably will if he's not fit), so the fifth bowler is a bit of a luxury. You can choose when you bowl him, rather than having to bowl him 15-20 overs each day. Obviously for a fifth bowler then things like adding variety is more important, as well as being a decent bat and fielder.

 

[tooextracool]

All this is true. But its clear his performance on the big stage in the T20 WC, propelled him into this 17-man squad. If he didn't play at most he would have been in the lions squad. Thats clear.

Err Rashid was in the squad that toured both India and West Indies during the winter, so I dont see how that makes sense.

WIth Monty's gradual decline, he was always likely to be a candidate if England are to consider the twin spin option. His t20 WC didnt really do anything to support him as he was ordinary throughout.

Its the same way Flintoff would have been rushed back into the side.

Or what AUS are doing with Lee ATM.

Fact is before his injury woes Sidebottom was one of ENG best test bowler for the last 18 months. He must go right back into the side.

Sidebottom was good against poor opposition and poor against good opposition. That is all we know for now.

Come on mayn, it was pretty much the same batsmen Anderson was bowling to & its pretty unanimously felt that Jimmy is ENG best bowlers ATM.

Jimmy was widely considered the pick of the England bowlers against SA at home last year (and unluckiest), and rightfully that was the first time it could be said that he appeared to have 'turned a corner' in his test career. Since then hes performed respectively on some docile pitches and on a difficult tour of both West Indies and India. Sidebottom has done none of the above.

The windies team Onions knocked down just looked awful. I dont know if they struggled to acclimatise quickly enough, exposed technically or both. But it clearly wasn't the same WI team that should all the fact down in the caribbean.

Well all of them including their captain have major technical flaws and this was always more likely to happen than not when they came over to England and got unfavorable batting conditions against bowlers who were capable of exploiting them

So as i said before his performances reminded me of Richard Johnson & young Anderson vs ZIM 03 going into the test matches vs SA.

Young Anderson of 2003 had potential but should not have come close to playing international cricket when he did. He was nowhere near good enough at the time, and it is unfortunate that he was playing for England at that time because not once did he look the goods in test match cricket until quite possibly the tour of India in 2006.

Richard Johnson on the other hand was a different case, and Onions could well go down that route, but as I said, you cant drop someone unless theres a perfectly valid reason to do so and there isnt with Onions.

Sidebottom gives the bowling attack more variety. The role Onions MAY play Braod could do..

Not really because Onions outperformed Broad consistently in the most recent series against WI. As of today, Broad is yet to bowl the same line and length that Onions hit against the WI.

Picking Sidebottom for variety is pointless, he needs to be good enough to play firstly.

 

[aussie]

Err Rashid was in the squad that toured both India and West Indies during the winter, so I dont see how that makes sense.

As experience. ENG where never seriously going to play him in IND during that ODI series when Yuvraj & co were on the rampage, nor the test series since we still had hope in Monty.

Same thing in the WI, if they seriously wanted to pick him. Batty wouldn't have been called up as Swann's replacement.

Its clear his performance in the T20, pushed him into this 17-man Ashes squad.

WIth Monty's gradual decline, he was always likely to be a candidate if England are to consider the twin spin option. His t20 WC didnt really do anything to support him as he was ordinary throughout.

Nah this is not you dawg, im going to give you a chance to retract this statement...

Jimmy was widely considered the pick of the England bowlers against SA at home last year (and unluckiest), and rightfully that was the first time it could be said that he appeared to have 'turned a corner' in his test career. Since then hes performed respectively on some docile pitches and on a difficult tour of both West Indies and India. Sidebottom has done none of the above.

Sidebottom was good against poor opposition and poor against good opposition. That is all we know for now.

Its the same poor opposition (new zealand) that Anderson took wickets againts, that Sidebottom did.

Sidebottom didn't do much vs SA mainly because he went into that series injured.

vs IND 07 he was solid, Prior's drop catches didn't help much. So also was the case in SRI.

Well all of them including their captain have major technical flaws and this was always more likely to happen than not when they came over to England and got unfavorable batting conditions against bowlers who were capable of exploiting them.

Exactly thats why Onions performances really cant hold much credence ATM, just like Bopara's hundreds.

Richard Johnson on the other hand was a different case, and Onions could well go down that route, but as I said, you cant drop someone unless theres a perfectly valid reason to do so and there isnt with Onions.

Well sometimes selectors need to be tough. The same way they could have dropped Thorpe for KP the last time. The same thing needs to be done with Oninons for Sidebottom.

Not really because Onions outperformed Broad consistently in the most recent series against WI. As of today, Broad is yet to bowl the same line and length that Onions hit against the WI.

Picking Sidebottom for variety is pointless, he needs to be good enough to play firstly.

Sidebottom would give the left-armer variety & will exploit any swinging conditions once fit.

We all know what Anderson & Flintoff & Swann will offer.

Broad hopefully with the lessons he learnt from bowling on those flat winter wickets i'd say he is a better position than Onions, when the likely situation of a docile surface comes about during this series - to war with the AUS batters.

No doubt it would be good if Sidebottom can get some wickets in the FC games before the Cardiff test, but i dont think it should be the ULTIMATE guide to whether he plays or not.

 

[Furball]

Onions did everything that could reasonably be expected of him in his 2 Tests thus far, and is the standout bowler this season in the County Championship.

There are no grounds whatsoever for replacing him with Sidebottom.

 

[tooextracool]

As experience. ENG where never seriously going to play him in IND during that ODI series when Yuvraj & co were on the rampage, nor the test series since we still had hope in Monty.

Same thing in the WI, if they seriously wanted to pick him. Batty wouldn't have been called up as Swann's replacement.

Its clear his performance in the T20, pushed him into this 17-man Ashes squad.

Nah this is not you dawg, im going to give you a chance to retract this statement...

Yeah, except since the winter series, it has become obvious that Monty has regressed and Batty is hopeless. 2 things we should have known well in advance. Therefore at this point, unless you have any better ideas, there is no other spinner in England who is better than Rashid at this point other than Swann. Therefore, if England are to play 2 spinners, then Rashid is the only option. The fact that hes been around the squad is further indication of the fact that they were grooming him for this opportunity at some point.

As far as his t20 performance is concerned, he was comfortably England's worst bowler with Anderson, Broad, Sidebottom, Swann and Mascarenhas all outperforming him. His t20 performances itself were poor, but what they did show was that he has potential for the test format and that he has a few variations up his sleeve.

Its the same poor opposition (new zealand) that Anderson took wickets againts, that Sidebottom did.

Sidebottom didn't do much vs SA mainly because he went into that series injured.

vs IND 07 he was solid, Prior's drop catches didn't help much. So also was the case in SRI.

Exactly thats why Onions performances really cant hold much credence ATM, just like Bopara's hundreds.


Well sometimes selectors need to be tough. The same way they could have dropped Thorpe for KP the last time. The same thing needs to be done with Oninons for Sidebottom.


Sidebottom would give the left-armer variety & will exploit any swinging conditions once fit.

We all know what Anderson & Flintoff & Swann will offer.

Broad hopefully with the lessons he learnt from bowling on those flat winter wickets i'd say he is a better position than Onions, when the likely situation of a docile surface comes about during this series - to war with the AUS batters.

No doubt it would be good if Sidebottom can get some wickets in the FC games before the Cardiff test, but i dont think it should be the ULTIMATE guide to whether he plays or not.

Thats exactly the point, Anderson has proven himself in the last year and a half whilst Sidebottom has mostly been injured.

Sidebottom of course was so solid in SL he took 5 wickets at 64 a piece.

And I cannot believe anyone can possibly be suggesting that the dropping of Thorpe for KP last time around was anything other than an absolute disgrace of a move that could have been potentially Ashes costing.

I dont understand the logic here, there is no justification for dropping Onions, hes done everything that Sidebottom hasn't. Whether or not some average player failed miserably in the past when he was given the selector's backing is irrelevant, and just because someone was wrongfully dropped by the selectors in the past doesnt mean that it should be done again.

 

[andruid]

And I cannot believe anyone can possibly be suggesting that the dropping of Thorpe for KP last time around was anything other than an absolute disgrace of a move that could have been potentially Ashes costing.

.

*suggests the above.

 

[tooextracool]

*suggests the above.

So it clearly made a lot of sense to drop someone who had been instrumental in almost every one of those series victories which England had won coming into the Ashes, someone with over 15 years of experience under his belt, someone who had a proven and excellent record against Shane Warne and Australia for someone who had never played a single test match? Would be about as stupid a move as dropping Flintoff now for Stuart Broad right now.

That it worked out so marvellously well doesnt take away from the fact that it was a poor decision ITFP.

 

[zaremba]

So it clearly made a lot of sense to drop someone who had been instrumental in almost every one of those series victories which England had won coming into the Ashes, someone with over 15 years of experience under his belt, someone who had a proven and excellent record against Shane Warne and Australia for someone who had never played a single test match? Would be about as stupid a move as dropping Flintoff now for Stuart Broad right now.

That it worked out so marvellously well doesnt take away from the fact that it was a poor decision ITFP.

Very interesting p.o.v. and I have to admit that I was pretty upset that Thorpe (a player I rated incredibly highly, albeit that he was in decline as a player and in particular as a fielder) was dropped.

As far as picking KP is concerned, though, he was not a random pick unsupported by reason or evidence. On the contrary, he was the sort of player who the England management rightly thought was needed to counter the uber-aggressive Australians, and had shown himself to thrive on the demands of high-intensity international cricket with his extraordinary exploits in South Africa a few months before.

What puzzles me is that if they were going to pick KP for the Ashes, why didn't they let him get his eye in against the hapless Bangladeshis in the early summer series?

 

[Uppercut]

Onions did everything that could reasonably be expected of him in his 2 Tests thus far, and is the standout bowler this season in the County Championship.

There are no grounds whatsoever for replacing him with Sidebottom.

Irrelevant. All that matters is which of them will take you scalps. If one isn't fit, then obviously the other must play. But if they're both fully fit, do you think Onions is more likely to take Aussie wickets than Sidebottom?

That's the question the selectors have to answer- not "are there any grounds for replacing him?" or "did he do everything that could be reasonably expected of him?" Let's not forget that- who's going to do the job for you is all that matters.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Very interesting p.o.v. and I have to admit that I was pretty upset that Thorpe (a player I rated incredibly highly, albeit that he was in decline as a player and in particular as a fielder) was dropped.

As far as picking KP is concerned, though, he was not a random pick unsupported by reason or evidence. On the contrary, he was the sort of player who the England management rightly thought was needed to counter the uber-aggressive Australians, and had shown himself to thrive on the demands of high-intensity international cricket with his extraordinary exploits in South Africa a few months before.

What puzzles me is that if they were going to pick KP for the Ashes, why didn't they let him get his eye in against the hapless Bangladeshis in the early summer series?

I don't think the selection was just about KP & Thorpey; the first Ashes test was only Bell's 4th test so I would guess the selectors must've at least toyed with the idea of omitting him despite his preternaturally high average at the time.

In fact, I actually advocated picking Kevin & Graham at the expense of Bell at the time, he said in full-on self-congratulatory mode.

Don't get many right, but I think subsequent events proved my prescience there; KP was our highest run scorer in the series and Warne was all over Bell like a rash. Little doubt in my mind Thorpe would've done better.

 

[FBU]

How to beat the Aussies - Times Online

What Mickey Arthur thinks of our bowlers

We felt Andrew Flintoff bowled too negatively against South Africa last summer. He bowled too wide of off stump, allowing our batsmen to leave too many deliveries. His five-for stats (two in 75 Tests, three in his first-class career) show he has mostly been a containing or defensive bowler. I’d like to see him used as a more attacking option because he has the ability to do that. Just as we did with Dale Steyn and Morne Morkel, I would like to see Flintoff given the licence to attack alongside James Anderson, whom we rated very highly when we faced him last year, while Stuart Broad is used as more of a control bowler, who will make the batsmen play and probe away around off stump. Then you have a bit more freedom with how you want your spinner to bowl.

I’ve been very impressed with Graeme Swann, who has convinced me that there can be a future for the orthodox off-spinner in Test cricket, contrary to popular belief (and mine). He likes to bowl an attacking line, which means he might go for more runs but will take wickets, especially against the left-handers in Australia’s top order. At the moment he is a better option than Monty Panesar, who had no variation against us in 2008. The ball was turning in the second innings at Edgbaston but, when Graeme Smith was sweeping him out of the rough, Panesar had nowhere to go, no Plan B.

As for the fourth seamer, I quite like Ryan Sidebottom, who gives you the variation in lines of attack, being a left-armer, and will create rough for Swann outside the right-hander’s off stump. The problem with Sidebottom is his pace. He was military medium against us last year and, if the ball is not swinging, you are in trouble. But if his pace is decent or the ball is swinging, he can be a useful control bowler. The other options are Graham Onions, who looks as if he bowls a heavy ball, or Harmison, who might well be required as the pace option if Flintoff is not fit