*Official* First Test at the Gabba

[GIMH]

. If you're going to discount the fifth bowler, I think discounting the 8 and 9 batsmen seems logical as well.

Not really, everyone bats but four bowlers is often enough (especially when the opposition have clowns like Hussey, North & Chimpy in their line-ups).

Agree with the rest of your post though.

 

[Prince EWS]

Not really, everyone bats but four bowlers is often enough (especially when the opposition have clowns like Hussey, North & Chimpy in their line-ups).

Agree with the rest of your post though.

Sometimes four isn't enough though. Having five (six even tbh, North's useful) bowling options > having four. You can't just ignore the fact that Australia have an extra couple of decent bowling options - or you can, but then it doesn't make sense to then take the batting all the way down to nine.

I'll put it this way - I don't think the bowling of Watson and North is less likely to have an impact on the series than the difference between the batting of Hauritz/Johnson and Broad/Swann.

 

[GIMH]

The double negative in your post hurts my brain

I know what you're saying, but i guess my point is that if I had to pick to just have four bowlers or to declare at seven down each time, I'd go with the former. I'm aware that I am stretching it there though and given that Watson can be considered frontline well bowling well, then the filth defo have the edge in terms of bowling depth

 

[Prince EWS]

The double negative in your post hurts my brain

I know what you're saying, but i guess my point is that if I had to pick to just have four bowlers or to declare at seven down each time, I'd go with the former. I'm aware that I am stretching it there though and given that Watson can be considered frontline well bowling well, then the filth defo have the edge in terms of bowling depth

Yeah but it's not like Hauritz and Johnson add 0 with the bat. We're not comparing Watson and North's bowling to Swann and Broad's complete contribution; merely to their contribution when compared with Hauritz and Johnson.

 

[Jarquis]

Collingwood to take 5

 

[GIMH]

Yeah but it's not like Hauritz and Johnson add 0 with the bat. We're not comparing Watson and North's bowling to Swann and Broad's complete contribution; merely to their contribution when compared with Hauritz and Johnson.

It's not like Colly adds nothing with the ball either, just might not take many wickets

 

[FBU]

Still can't get over these bowling stats

Cricket Records | MCC Spirit of Cricket Test Series, 2010 - Australia | Records | Batting and bowling averages | Cricinfo.com

 

[Tom 1972]

No doubt, Australia is carrying good form into the Ashes.....

 

[tooextracool]

Don't know how well Onions would've gone here to be honest. Despite his reputation as an honest, hit-the-deck trier, what he actually is, is a pitch-it-up swing and seam merchant, who bowls an extremely large percentage of his balls on the stumps. That can often be highly ineffective in Australia and go for plenty of runs.

Not sure if you and I have been watching the same Onions, I would consider him a poor man's Asif - a little bit of swing and mostly seam movement. Bowling on the stumps doesn't always mean pitching the ball up and trying to swing it. Fair enough, his style of bowling might not be most conducive to the regular Australian conditions but Id still rather have him over the Finn that we've seen thus far.

On Pattinson, I actually thought he did ok on debut leaving all the controversy over his selection aside.Im not sold on Bresnan either, not sure why he's been given an extended run in the side over some superior bowlers.

 

[Prince EWS]

Not sure if you and I have been watching the same Onions, I would consider him a poor man's Asif - a little bit of swing and mostly seam movement. Bowling on the stumps doesn't always mean pitching the ball up and trying to swing it. Fair enough, his style of bowling might not be most conducive to the regular Australian conditions but Id still rather have him over the Finn that we've seen thus far.

Yeah I'd take him ahead of Finn too but I don't think there'd be much in it here.

On Pattinson, I actually thought he did ok on debut leaving all the controversy over his selection aside.

Indeed. Terrible selection; not a terrible player though. It'd be out of the box this time as well but it'd make a little more sense. Probably a needlessly disruptive move but given he took eight-fa for Victoria a week or two ago he'd be worth thinking about. More likely to bowl well on Australian wickets than Bresnan, IMO.

 

[zaremba]

I reckon the teams are about equal on batting though. Each of them have class from 1 to 7 but severe problems with form/decline/inconsistency in a couple of their players. The difference will be in the bowling and I think England have a better attack for English conditions while Australia have a better attack for Australian conditions. So I'm tipping Australia, but only because of the HGA. The teams are extremely even IMO.

This.

Don't know how well Onions would've gone here to be honest. Despite his reputation as an honest, hit-the-deck trier, what he actually is, is a pitch-it-up swing and seam merchant, who bowls an extremely large percentage of his balls on the stumps. That can often be highly ineffective in Australia and go for plenty of runs.

He does bowl a lot of balls on the stumps, but that - and decent pace - are his weapons. He's never been particularly reliant on seam or swing.

 

[Woodster]

Yes I think Onions will be a miss for us, he bowls swiftly and consistenly on a tight off-stump line with just enough seam movement to trouble the batsman. He'll run in all day and be at the batsman. If we fail to win the series, I don't think he is that integral to the side at this stage to say it would be because he wasn't available, but he would strengthen the side if he was fit.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Yes I think Onions will be a miss for us, He'll run in all day and be at the batsman.

That is possibly what we'll miss most.He is a genuine workhorse in the Hoggard mould and we don't have one in the pace attack now.

 

[Ruckus]

How appropriate, no Onions to make the Aussies cry.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Yep,that's shallot.

 

[Woodster]

That is possibly what we'll miss most.He is a genuine workhorse in the Hoggard mould and we don't have one in the pace attack now.

Not that will be in the starting XI, but we do have Bresnan, who is not of the same quality, imo, as Onions, who is of a similar ilk, who will bustle in, keep his pace at the same decent level from first ball to last, but probably lacks the threat and excellent control of Onions.

But I agree that that is one of the attributes we'll miss in Onions.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Not that will be in the starting XI, but we do have Bresnan, who is not of the same quality, imo, as Onions, who is of a similar ilk, who will bustle in, keep his pace at the same decent level from first ball to last, but probably lacks the threat and excellent control of Onions.

But I agree that that is one of the attributes we'll miss in Onions.

I like Bresnan but i don't think he is in the same league as Onions and doesn't seem to have the control to succeed at test level.He is a massive part of the one day side though as he is an all rounder and i'd pick him in every one day match to make sure that the likes of Anderson and Broad are rested as when is needed to keep them at their best.

I guess we just have to hope Swann can keep a lid on one end all series which is asking a lot as they will surely target him to try and put him off his stride.

 

[Woodster]

I like Bresnan but i don't think he is in the same league as Onions and doesn't seem to have the control to succeed at test level.He is a massive part of the one day side though as he is an all rounder and i'd pick him in every one day match to make sure that the likes of Anderson and Broad are rested as when is needed to keep them at their best.

I guess we just have to hope Swann can keep a lid on one end all series which is asking a lot as they will surely target him to try and put him off his stride.

Yes, Bresnan is an honest trier, but just lacks that extra bit of quality to become a starter in the Test XI. On flat decks he still gives his all and can manage to get some reverse if conditions suit, like he did in Bangladesh. But against top batsmen he does come up a little short. Decent back-up option mind.

In ODI's I agree that he's become a very useful member of the squad for what he offers with ball and bat.

Swann is naturally key, and it should be an area where we have a healthy advantage over the Aussies. They may look to attack him as they're aware he is vital to our 4-man attack working effectively, but expect Swann to relish the battle. I do hope we're not overly reliant on him having to be our most economical and threatening bowler every innings, he will need support from the quicker men.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

He will get the support,i expect Broad and Finn to do well and use their height to advantage.Both are very fast learners and should be able to adapt to bowling the different lengths needed in Australia.Anderson is a worry,yes he will destroy the Aussies if he gets the right conditions but how often is he likely to get them in Australia,the rest of the time he is cannon fodder though he is a little bit wiser and less of a liability than he was 3 or 4 years ago.

 

[aussie tragic]

Just to put a different perspective on who to pick for the first test, the averages for Australia V England since 2000

Hussey 734 runs @ 56.46
Clarke 1172 runs @ 55.80
North 367 runs @ 52.42
Ponting 2075 runs @ 51.87
Watson 248 runs @ 48.00
Haddin 278 runs @ 46.33
Katich 604 runs @ 33.55