*Official* Road to the 2010/11 Ashes

[zaremba]

Nah, it's half the fun tbh.

The 2009 Ashes wouldn't have been the same without the intense rivalry and back and forth with rivera, pizzorno, king peitersen etc.

Yeah I know and the Aussie drum-beating made the win very much sweeter when it happened, but surely we all should try to do better than "our players are better than yours".

 

[pasag]

Yeah I know and the Aussie drum-beating made the win very much sweeter when it happened, but surely we all should try to do better than "our players are better than yours".

But even from an analytical point of view, it's important to rate the players when trying to predict the outcome of the series. Ours > yours, therefore we'll likely win etc

 

[zaremba]

But even from an analytical point of view, it's important to rate the players when trying to predict the outcome of the series. Ours > yours, therefore we'll likely win etc

Oh alright then. We rock, you suck

 

[Jono]

As a bowler? Don't reckon there's much in it. Siddle didn't bowl as poorly as his figures suggested throughout the home summer. I'd take him in Australian conditions over Broad.

EDIT: To Jono, RE: Broad vs Siddle.

Agree with Jack, in Aussie conditions, I'd back Siddle more than Broad. Siddle's definitely got some development to go and his figures didn't show how well he bowled, especially in Adelaide.

To be fair, the statement was "Siddle is better than all of England's bowlers". Not sure you can definitively say he's better overall than Broad.

 

[Richard]

Yeah because guyfromlancs is clearly unbiased in his assessment of the Australian team

Regardless of any bias of GuyFromLancs or most other posters, clearly there's no sense in taking Streetwise posts seriously because his\her attitude is simply Australian > not-Australian. That's just a general pointer.

 

[Richard]

See, if anything it's the opposite. If we were just structurally poor then losing the Ashes would be a cause for concern. But winning key moments comes with experience and that won't be an issue going forward.

The fact that the key run-outs at vital times came from two of the relatively few faces in the side which could be called experienced puts paid to that idea, IMO. Winning key moments comes with having a level head and keeping your cool when the intensity is high, something which whatever anyone may think is far more a product of nature than nurture.

Ponting, for instance, has always lacked in this respect.

Meanwhile, if you put the failure to dismiss Monty Panesar down to inexperience then, well, you really have got a problem.

 

[Nate]

I'd back Broad to do better than Siddle on Australian decks tbh.

 

[Richard]

Also not sure how apt the accusations of choking are after Australia managed to come back from a 200+ run deficit to beat Pakistan, considering that England folded for 180 and 169 in their most recent, must-not-lose Test against South Africa.

The idea that England have it over Australia in terms of avoiding allowing the vital-ness of a moment to distract you has nothing going for it, but Australia did, no two ways about, fluff things up on occasions in 2009. England had been damn close to losing twice before in South Africa, I don't really see how the fact that they finally did shows anything about the ole' choking.

 

[wpdavid]

Given England's opponents between now & the Ashes, it strike me that our bowlers will struggle to do badly enough to be dropped - so that whoever bowls against Bang in a week or so will almost certainly be in the frame in November. I suppose the absence of Anderson for this series provides a bit of competition, but even that won't happen if we pick two spinners next month. That means the selectors have to get the attack dead right straight away, otherwise we'll be lumbered with a no-hoper against Aus simply because he knocked over a few Bang guys and held his own against Pakistan's fragile batting lineup.

All that being said, I'm not confident about our attack, whoever plays. Apparently Anderson is a certainty, but he was pretty under-whelming in our last two series. Broad needs to improve again by as much as he did during 2009 to be a consistent threat. That could happen, but he won't be helped by the cheap wickets that are on offer over the next 6 months. Hopefully Flower will recognise that he messed up big time leaving out Onions - not that I think he's a world beater, but I think he may be better than Anderson or Sidebottom next winter.

As for our batting, I dunno. Trott hasn't done that well at number 3, so I can't see how that position's as settled as people say. I think KP will come good. And the rest of the top 7 are pretty much certainties anyway. Maybe if one or two of them have a complete mare against Asif & co that might change, but I don't think it will happen. Not often enough to get them dropped, anyway.

 

[Richard]

The Pakistanis are likely to drop them so many times that them being dropped is not the remotest of possibilities.

So to speak.

Either way, you get the point - bowling of calibre of Asif, Gul etc. is no use if the fielding is as diabolical as it was in Pakistan's most recent series.

I think we can take it as a pretty decent read that England's top-seven in November will be Strauss, Cook, Trott, Pietersen, Collingwood, Bell, Prior. And TBF, I hope so too. Don't see any remote evidence presently that there's better out there.

 

[Pothas]

The Pakistanis are likely to drop them so many times that them being dropped is not the remotest of possibilities.

So to speak.

Either way, you get the point - bowling of calibre of Asif, Gul etc. is no use if the fielding is as diabolical as it was in Pakistan's most recent series.

I think we can take it as a pretty decent read that England's top-seven in November will be Strauss, Cook, Trott, Pietersen, Collingwood, Bell, Prior. And TBF, I hope so too. Don't see any remote evidence presently that there's better out there.

I certainly cannot see a change being made on form apart from maybe Trott, although I think he is likely to get enough runs this summer for him to be in the side come the winter but there is always the issue of injury, although that it is probably more likely to effect the bowling there is bound to be at least one injury that changes the makeup of the side in some way.

Things can also change very quickly, just look at the way that Swann has emerged so quickly to become one of the first names on the team sheet, I would be willing to bet that at least one player that has yet to make his debut will play an important part in the ashes series.

 

[zaremba]

I certainly cannot see a change being made on form apart from maybe Trott, although I think he is likely to get enough runs this summer for him to be in the side come the winter but there is always the issue of injury, although that it is probably more likely to effect the bowling there is bound to be at least one injury that changes the makeup of the side in some way.

Things can also change very quickly, just look at the way that Swann has emerged so quickly to become one of the first names on the team sheet, I would be willing to bet that at least one player that has yet to make his debut will play an important part in the ashes series.

Yeah AWTA entirely. Who knows, maybe Saj Mahmood or Chris Woakes will star Down Under. Frankly it's pretty hard to predict.

 

[Richard]

Mostly, when there's still 8 months to go until a series, that's true. But as I say, it should be a given that everyone will score at worst decently against Bangladesh (if they don't we can worry about some rather more prescient matters), and Pakistan are unlikely to catch well enough to cause serious failure on the part of any England batsman.

I've lost count of the number of times I've said what you guys have essentially said (ie, that the regularity with which an unexpected name comes out of nowhere in a very short time is second-to-none - to give a 2009 example, who'd have thought Onions would've been playing even 3-4 months before the series started?) but here is quite an unusual case.

And it's unusual not just because of the fact that Bangladesh and even-more-drop-happy-than-usual Pakistan are our only opponents between now and the series in question, but for (as I also mentioned earlier) the fact that for about the first time I can remember and almost certainly the first time in would-be about 40 years (my memory of course does not stretch back anywhere near that far), I have strong confidence in each of the England top-seven.

 

[Pothas]

Mostly, when there's still 8 months to go until a series, that's true. But as I say, it should be a given that everyone will score at worst decently against Bangladesh (if they don't we can worry about some rather more prescient matters), and Pakistan are unlikely to catch well enough to cause serious failure on the part of any England batsman.

I've lost count of the number of times I've said what you guys have essentially said (ie, that the regularity with which an unexpected name comes out of nowhere in a very short time is second-to-none - to give a 2009 example, who'd have thought Onions would've been playing even 3-4 months before the series started?) but here is quite an unusual case.

And it's unusual not just because of the fact that Bangladesh and even-more-drop-happy-than-usual Pakistan are our only opponents between now and the series in question, but for (as I also mentioned earlier) the fact that for about the first time I can remember and almost certainly the first time in would-be about 40 years (my memory of course does not stretch back anywhere near that far), have strong confidence in each of the England top-seven.

Really? I think they are adequate but I would stop short at saying I strong confidence in them. Cook and Strauss are almost certainly inked in for the oppening spot but that does not mean I have confidence in Cook performing in Australia, I really hope he does. Trott has played very little international cricket and has verred from exceptional (first test) to fairly woefull (last test). Pietersen I have total confidence in no matter how he has played in recent times. Collingwood yeah but I would be far from surprised if he had a poor run. Bell I have an awful lot more faith in than most but he still has plenty of doubters. Prior is fine but could still come under some pressure, for example what if he breaks a finger early in the summer and Kieswetter comes in and smashes Bangladesh and Pakistan? These sort of things will always happen and I don't expect this summer to be any differnet.

 

[Richard]

What I essentially mean is that I don't see there being any obvious question-marks over any of the seven if they remain fit (anyone, and I mean anyone, can lose his place due to an untimely injury) - all bar Trott have done enough to establish their credentials at Test level right now, and as I mentioned earlier Trott has done about as much as anyone can to suggest he's likely to before long. That doesn't mean you can bank on them to all perform series after series - Cook and Collingwood especially have always been batsmen given to lengthy spells of unproductivity, and especially in the latter's case I don't see that ever changing for however longer he plays - he's, what, 33 now.

If Trott performs well this summer against Pakistan, which I think it is more than reasonable to hope he will do, and everyone remains fit, then I see England entering The Ashes and the 2011 home summer with a top-seven that can feel completely at ease with their places. Consider - have you any memory of a time when that could come close to being said?

 

[Pothas]

Yeah I think that is essentially true if we ignore the injury issue but I would put it down more to the lack of alternatives than any confidence of the current set-up. There has in recent times normally been a player injured (often Vaughan) who it was assumed would come back in when fit. That is obviously not the case right now but it is certainly worth pointing that Bell (reintroduction in his case of course) and Trott are recent additions and are not many bad scores away from coming under pressure.

 

[GIMH]

Like the last Ashes where England had the spinning advantage? Swann won't be able to do much here like most spinners and there'll be no swing for Anderson and co.

There's no way ANY touring side coming into Australia, one of the hardest places in the world to tour will be favourites.

Hussey's seems like he's back in Tests, recently won a match off his own bat. The bowling attack is coming off nicely with Bollinger making his mark, so yeah... Not saying England can't win it, just that they're not favourites.

People can go on with this fable about Hauritz outbowling Swann last summer until the cows come home, fact is Swann bowled us to victory on the final day twice (bit of help from Freddie the first time ) and that's what spinners are for. We do have the spin advantage as far as I can ee but as you and Burgey have said, it's not likely to be a factor this time out.

I think people are overstating it by saying Australia's bowling is more better than ours. More consistent, definitely, but on a good day I'd take ours, quite easily. Only Jimmeh is heavily reliant on swing, Broad much less so - with him, if he gets his line and length right, he'll take wickets, and Onions isn't an out and out swing bowler at all.

Whilst it's often said we struggle on flat decks, the making of Broad was the Carribean last year, you'll never see flatter pitches.

Nah, it's half the fun tbh.

The 2009 Ashes wouldn't have been the same without the intense rivalry and back and forth with rivera, pizzorno, king peitersen etc.

must-try-harder

 

[Richard]

Yeah I think that is essentially true if we ignore the injury issue but I would put it down more to the lack of alternatives than any confidence of the current set-up.

"Lack of alternatives" is often a deliberately negative way of looking at "the best players are currently in there". Apart from the fact that the latter is just about all any cricket supporter has any remote right to ask of selectors, the instance where you can look at the seven best players to bat in the top seven and say that, in a Test starting tomorrow, you could have reasonable confidence in them all is very rare - for England or anyone else. Even West Indies between 1976 and 1986 and Australia between 1989 and 2006/07 (two of the best sides the game has seen, which current-England are not remotely close to being) had such a thing only for a season at a time, absolute maximum.

And BTW, currently England have in the way of batting alternatives Carberry, Shah and Joyce (and, maybe, whisper it, Morgan). None of whom are write-offs with no realistic chance of Test success - if any was brought in in place of one of the top seven tomorrow I would believe it possible that they could succeed. You can never, ever know with an untried player, but all of them have something going for them.

There has in recent times normally been a player injured (often Vaughan) who it was assumed would come back in when fit. That is obviously not the case right now but it is certainly worth pointing that Bell (reintroduction in his case of course) and Trott are recent additions and are not many bad scores away from coming under pressure.

No player, ever, is more than 3-4 bad scores away from coming under scrutiny - more so these days than ever. The point I'm making is that this is a rare occasion when I feel genuinely confident that there is no undue prospect of such a thing happening in the immediate future to any of the England top seven. No-one, ever, knows with any real conviction what is coming - players go off-the-boil, terminally and temporarily, for no apparant reason (or due to totally unforeseen circumstances) with considerable regularity. But such things can only be dealt with when they happen - they are different to when there is a genuine "gap" in a side.

Personally I think all of the England top seven have demonstrated that they are capable of playing the role currently asked of them to Test standard - Strauss and Pietersen more than the rest, yes, but at just about any point in the last 18 years I've always looked at the side in the most recently concluded Test and there's been someone in the top seven who I know is, in the immediate future, less likely than more to perform - or else someone I know could be axed next game without any serious "WTF?" complaints.

 

[FBU]

I don't see the number 3 position as sealed yet. It also isn't definite that we will play 6 batsmen. It will be interesting to see what the plan is in Bangladesh.

 

[Richard]

If England yet again revert to the six-batsmen-five-bowler theory someone needs to be shot. That doesn't, of course, mean such a thing is unduly unlikely.