• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

*Official* Road to 2013 Ashes

Cabinet96

Hall of Fame Member
The thing I find most perplexing about England's batting is that everyone used to amass massive scores and now we're lucky if the guys convert their starts to 100's, let alone 200's. Trott got about 4 scores of over 50 last summer but didn't get one 80. That's worrying for a guy who used to make 150 for fun after reaching 50. Cook and KP are the only ones to have made more than 130 odd in an innings since the India series in 2011.

Recently concluded Lords test is a perfect example as well. In the first innings everyone in the top order faced at least 60 balls, yet the highest score was 41.

They usually have though :laugh:

The most notable exception I can think of was Ponting at home against India, and that's about as useful as Hussey really.
Cowan at Brisbane and Warner at Adelaide, against the Saffa's as well. Although you probably don't count the latter :p
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
Eng have Cook, Bell, KP, Prior and Trott averaging mid 40s+ and Root coming up. Compton's ok. Bairstow's about. You haven't watched Aus to get some perspective have you?
I've been banging the "Australia's lineup is ****ing pants" drum for longer than pretty much anyone on CW.

England's is pretty awful as well. Every score of substance since India were on these shores has had Cook and/or KP scoring pretty heavily. If neither of them fire then the batting just falls to pieces.

Bell and Trott have been absolutely terrible for the last 2 years and Root and Compton are unproven. That's not a particularly solid lineup.
 

adub

International Captain
I don't think it's hard at all to imagine that the Australian quicks can make a pretty big mess of the England batting in multiple innings. Obviously the England attack are pretty likely to do the same to us a few times either, but talk of us being no hope is way overblown.

England deserve to start favourites, but I rate this a better Australian side than the last Ashes side. Our bowling is miles better in every respect. Our batting is really no worse, and our onfield leadership will be a lot more aggressive. England however aren't a better side than the last time we met them. Maybe no worse, or not much, but certainly no better. It will be a really competitive series I reckon.
 

the big bambino

International Captain
But thats the nature of batting line ups isn't it? Form is hardly ever even throughout the side so a few carry the rest. Big problem when they few is one called Clarke who is due for a correction sometime. Not such a big problem when you have 5 men averaging in the mid 40s plus someone like Root. The form baton can be passed around with a little more security. Your batting's too strong and your bowling well settled.

Too others don't write off Tremlett. There's still time to find form and if required he's still worth a gamble otherwise. As to the heroic assumptions in Social's post; well it could rain and we could avert a blotting that way.
 

Adders

Cricketer Of The Year
England deserve to start favourites, but I rate this a better Australian side than the last Ashes side. Our bowling is miles better in every respect. Our batting is really no worse, and our onfield leadership will be a lot more aggressive.
I think you definitely have a better bowling attack this time around, provided you can get them through 5 tests which has got to be your biggest concern. But your batting is way way worse.......

In 2010/11 you had an in form Watson, Haddin peaking with his batting and then of course Clarke (not as good then but still good) and Hussey.

Now, you've got Clarke, end of story. Your next best is what....Warner?? Career ave less than 40 and currently ranked outside the top 30.

I think our own batting is worse than it was last time no doubt about that, but we still beat you in every position bar Clarke IMO. England have 5 bats in the top 30 you have 1.

I reckon MW is right on the money. For Australia to win this series it will require 1 or 2 of the Aussie batsmen apart from Clarke to come of age and have a very good series...........and that certainly is not an impossibility.
 

adub

International Captain
Clarke was rubbish in the last Ashes (ave 21), Kat never got going (ave 24) and Hughes was worse (ave 16), Ponting was utter gash (ave 16), North got his arse punted (also ave 16) and Smith (ave 32) and Khawaja (ave 29) showed only minor glimpses of being up to the level.

So yeah Huss (ave 63), Watson (ave 48) and Hadds (ave 45) made the few runs we strung together. But you'd have to have some pretty rose coloured glasses on to think that pile of **** will go better than our current line up. We stank massively and those numbers are pretty comparable to what we just turned out in India. It really was that bad - for a home series. :puke:

Now Clarke is the obvious one to fill the Huss role. No guarantees of course, but on form you have to pick him as most likely to score heavily. Haddin seems to be at his best against England and had his best summer in a long while so no reason to assume he won't contribute again. And our tail bat much better than the last Ashes series too.

Watson's runs are a little harder to make up, but I reckon Warner has them covered. Whilst we haven't seen him in English conditions yet I think he'll do a lot better than he has managed on the slow tracks in India and Carribean. He averages 50 in Australia and whilst English tracks aren't going to be as good for him as home, they will still come on enough for him to make runs. Even his 24 ave in India last series would have had him in our better bats in the last Ashes. He'll go ok.

As for the rest Hughes, Cowan, and Rogers will all go better than the men they've replaced from last time (or were last time) I've no doubt. Watson is an enigma, but if he doesn't perform Khawaja or Wade will come in. Whatever way we go, it's hard to imagine we won't go better with the bat than the last Ashes effort which was utterly disgraceful. Nothing like way worse, we're better (but have no depth). The question of how much better will be answered on the field. A couple of break outs will be much much better obvs, but even just solid mid-30s Cowanesq averages will be an improvement.

India was a massive kick in the guts for us no doubt, but India has always been our bogey trip. You can't read too much into that. We performed reasonably well last summer and SA were damn close to being 2-0 down before they got really firing in Perth and we accounted for SL pretty convincingly. That's more indicative of what we'll be like in the Ashes. Not saying we'll come over and give you a repeat of 89, but we're in this. Should be tight and probably will come down to a 2-1 result like the last two tours. Hopefully 2-1 to the good this time though.
 
Last edited:

Spikey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
1 warner
2 cowan
3 rogers
4 hughes
5 clarke
6 copeland
7 haddin
8 agar
9 starc
10 pattinson
11 hogan
 

theegyptian

International Vice-Captain
Robson
Rogers
Cowan
Jaques
Katich
Allenby
M Johnson(WK) - not that one. (Worcester)
Crook
Copeland
Maggofin
Hogan

Narrowly missed selection: Klinger, Bailey, Burns, North, Quiney(with shoulder in a sling), Walters, Thorp, Claydon.
 

Spikey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
i think i'd rather give copeland the gloves and just have some guy take over when copeland is bowling
 

social

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Robson
Rogers
Cowan
Jaques
Katich
Allenby
M Johnson(WK) - not that one. (Worcester)
Crook
Copeland
Maggofin
Hogan

Narrowly missed selection: Klinger, Bailey, Burns, North, Quiney(with shoulder in a sling), Walters, Thorp, Claydon.
One of the stupid thing about Australia announcing their squad so early is that they would have to be sorely tempted to approach Robson today based on current form

I understand that he enjoys Middlesex but I would find it very hard to believe that he would knock back the chance of representing his country
 

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
If I had to make a decision on the Aussie batting order based on style of play than just form.. I would go with the following:



Rogers/Cowan (personal pref - Rogers)
Watson
Hughes
Clarke (c)
Cowan/Rogers/Khawaja (personal pref. - Cowan)
Warner
Haddin (vc)



It strikes the right balance for me, between the stroke players and the grafters.. Watson at the top can play his natural game, given the solidity of Rogers/Cowan at the other end. Hughes is apparently being groomed as the next #3 and he showed enough fight towards the end in India to make it seem he will be worth the investment. Clarke should NOT bat at 5 just because he has good numbers there. Realistically speaking, you want your best batsman to bat as high as possible. IMO, the top order (top 3) is a specialist area in your team, so Clarke shouldn't be pushed to be someone he is not. But what he is, is a middle order batsman and the best in the side at that... He SHOULD bat at the highest available slot and guide the team's batting. The other guy out of Cowan/Rogers or maybe even Khawaja can bat at 5 and provide a bit of solidity in terms of batting time to cushion the aggressive Warner and Haddin at 6 and 7.
 

Flem274*

123/5
Bit much to be calling the English batting weak. Too much focus on Bell, Compton and Bairstow and not enough focus on Cook, Trott, KP and Prior.

Even Compton has hundreds to his name against a decent attack.

Australia will still knock over the English cheaply a few times but that's to be expected because Pattinson and Siddle are very good bowlers, and the former has it in him to be a great bowler.

If Australia are to win though then I think Starc and Lyon need to come to the party on a consistent basis so England are restricted to scores Australia can reach on current batting form. Or you could keep Harris fit for 5 tests, but that is probably in the realm of fantasy.

Anyway I think a lot of the knocking of the English batting stems from the good batting line up collapses so they are now terrible/good bowling line up gets smashed so they are now terrible thing.

Everyone in the world is terrible.
 

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
Root is also quality.

Compton and Bairstow aren't great but they won't get out to poor bowling. The Aussies will need to work for their wickets.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
Bit much to be calling the English batting weak. Too much focus on Bell, Compton and Bairstow and not enough focus on Cook, Trott, KP and Prior.

Even Compton has hundreds to his name against a decent attack.

Australia will still knock over the English cheaply a few times but that's to be expected because Pattinson and Siddle are very good bowlers, and the former has it in him to be a great bowler.

If Australia are to win though then I think Starc and Lyon need to come to the party on a consistent basis so England are restricted to scores Australia can reach on current batting form. Or you could keep Harris fit for 5 tests, but that is probably in the realm of fantasy.

Anyway I think a lot of the knocking of the English batting stems from the good batting line up collapses so they are now terrible/good bowling line up gets smashed so they are now terrible thing.

Everyone in the world is terrible.
See when half your batting lineup is piss, it means your batting is a weakness. Because it becomes awfully prone to ridiculous collapses when the non-**** batsmen don't score runs.

See: Australia 2009-12.
 

Top