*Official* Second Test at Lords

[tooextracool]

How do you change a game that hasn't started?

Just meant that with Harmison in the side, the England team was completely transformed and the bowling attack just had a different feel to it. Hence they brought a different 'game' to SA than they had for the preceding part of the series. Didnt mean it literally.

 

[biased indian]

KP to score a big hundred and ponting to get a pair.....the result dont matter much for me

 

[frey]

KP to score a big hundred and ponting to get a pair.....the result dont matter much for me

An interesting prediction. Is this based on what you saw in the first test, or just a hunch?

 

[social]

Agree with Athers here

Andrew Flintoff no longer money in bank for England - Times Online

Interesting that the wicket is "green around the gills"

IMO, Eng's supposed pre-Ashes strategy of attacking Oz with spin was always bound to fail and they are far better off preparing seaming tracks, especially if Clark is not fit, as:

a. Oz batsmen generally dont like it; and

b. It will benefit Eng's pace bowlers far more than the Australians

 

[biased indian]

An interesting prediction. Is this based on what you saw in the first test, or just a hunch?

its a prediction with which i will be very very happy

 

[four_or_six]

So, Duncan Fletcher's column says we shouldn't pick Harmy because we need 'tough characters'. Ouch. I see the main question as whether we risk a 7/8 of Broad/Swann. For me, I would go for it. I still genuinely believe one of the few things we have over the Aussies is our gumption to go in with five bowlers. Can't understand why they don't tbh, but that's another matter.

Strauss
Cook
Bopara
Pietersen
Collingwood
Prior
Broad
Swann
Anderson
Harmison
Onions

The alternative being

Strauss
Cook
Bopara
Pietersen
Collingwood
Bell
Prior
Broad
Swann
Anderson
Onions.

And that just looks too defensive to me. Would rather we just go for it.

 

[TT Boy]

Agree with Athers here

Andrew Flintoff no longer money in bank for England - Times Online

Interesting that the wicket is "green around the gills"

IMO, Eng's supposed pre-Ashes strategy of attacking Oz with spin was always bound to fail and they are far better off preparing seaming tracks, especially if Clark is not fit, as:

a. Oz batsmen generally dont like it; and

b. It will benefit Eng's pace bowlers far more than the Australians

But Australia don't win test matches on roads (Cape Town, Perth, MCG, India, Cardiff ).

Johnson got wickets and bowled poorly on an unresponsive wicket, God help England if there is some pace and seam movement at Lord's.

 

[social]

But Australia don't win test matches on roads (Cape Town, Perth, MCG, India, Cardiff ).

Johnson got wickets and bowled poorly on an unresponsive wicket, God help England if there is some pace and seam movement at Lord's.

0-0 means Oz retains the Ashes

Better to take a punt, play to your strengths (pace bowling) and trust your batsmen to stand up better than the opposition

 

[pasag]

Yeah Australia and England are two of the more hopeless bowling sides in the world on flat picthes and both bowling attacks exponentially improve when there's something in it for the bowlers. Don't know who less-batsmen friendly pitches help more, but the cricket'll be a million times better which is the only important thing really.

 

[Uppercut]

This one's within 3 years:

2nd Test: England v Pakistan at Manchester, Jul 27-29, 2006 | Cricket Scorecard | Cricinfo.com

That's the game I was referring to.

 

[Uppercut]

Agree with Athers here

Andrew Flintoff no longer money in bank for England - Times Online

Interesting that the wicket is "green around the gills"

IMO, Eng's supposed pre-Ashes strategy of attacking Oz with spin was always bound to fail and they are far better off preparing seaming tracks, especially if Clark is not fit, as:

a. Oz batsmen generally dont like it; and

b. It will benefit Eng's pace bowlers far more than the Australians

Didn't work for South Africa. Epic failure for them, in fact.

 

[Steulen]

It's the most damning indictment of the Cardiff pitch I can think of, that Lord's is expected to be spicier. Let's face it, in all probability this one will be a draw as well no matter who gets to bowl.

It doesn't help that the batting line-ups appear ot be a good deal stronger than the bowling attacks either.

 

[Uppercut]

It's the most damning indictment of the Cardiff pitch I can think of, that Lord's is expected to be spicier. Let's face it, in all probability this one will be a draw as well no matter who gets to bowl.

It doesn't help that the batting line-ups appear ot be a good deal stronger than the bowling attacks either.

England's bowling attack is miles better than their batting IMO. Australia, no argument.

 

[Uppercut]

Agree with Athers here

Andrew Flintoff no longer money in bank for England - Times Online

Completely agree too. The thing about a lot of the English is, they still live in 2005, where Harmison is a threatening bowler with real pace and bounce, Flintoff is a talismanic all-rounder who will win them the Ashes, a five-man attack is the best option for England and the only way to score any runs against Australia is to throw the bat at every ball.

 

[Burgey]

Didn't work for South Africa. Epic failure for them, in fact.

In fact, with Ausratlia's attack being so inexperienced, they'd revel in spicier decks.
As yoy noted, they did in SA. Those pitches turned an attack that couldn't bowl SA out into a bloody dangerous outfut. Siddle and Hilf to excel if they do it, Johnson to kill someone.

 

[vic_orthdox]

I think England's five man attack works, whilst one of Flintoff or the keeper is capable of batting at 6. At the moment, I think that Prior is capable of that, and then you have three guys who could bat at 8 down to 9.

 

[Uppercut]

I think England's five man attack works, whilst one of Flintoff or the keeper is capable of batting at 6. At the moment, I think that Prior is capable of that, and then you have three guys who could bat at 8 down to 9.

It does mean that you have to put up with a below-par keeper, though. Personally I'd have Foster in the side with Prior a specialist 6. Particularly when the fifth bowler is someone as fundamentally useless as Monty Panesar.

You can debate what the best option is, but I'm criticising the reasoning behind aspects of the English public. Nasser Hussain's argument for a five-man attack was that "it was the winning blueprint from 2005".

 

[tooextracool]

The 5 man bowling attack is only an option when Flintoff is playing and it is a very good option especially with someone like Prior because it allows England to field an extra bowler in the side, and it also gives us the opportunity to protect 1 or 2 bowlers who might not be suited to the conditions on any given day.

Without Flintoff, it makes no sense to go in with a 5 man attack and England would be better served with Anderson, Onions, Swann and Harmison.

 

[zaremba]

You can debate what the best option is, but I'm criticising the reasoning behind aspects of the English public. Nasser Hussain's argument for a five-man attack was that "it was the winning blueprint from 2005".

Yeah I couldn't agree more. Very flabby thinking from Nasser but it's the sort of logic that does, amazingly, hold sway from time to time in the selectors' minds.

I wouldn't want us to play 5 bowlers at Lord's. So if Freddie is out, I'd bring in Bell, Harmison and Onions to replace him, Broad and Panesar. I would bat Bell at 6 where he's done ok in the past.

 

[jondavluc]

To me in depends on the surface for England if it is a flat track I might want the extra bowler.If it has something for the bowlers then I might want the extra batsmen.