Who are you supporting?

[hendrix]

I don't mind Johnson. He's not that good but he's not that bad. Glorious batsman to watch as well.

Strongly dislike Haddin. Not the biggest fan of Prior either.

I like Watson but I dislike him batting in the top 3. He's a number 6 all the way. Given that his bowling is less and less useful, I'd rather they put someone with a chance of averaging 40 there. They could have Clarke at 4, Smith at 5 or vice versa, doesn't really matter.

Cowan and Lyon my favs.

 

[benchmark00]

I like Watson but I dislike him batting in the top 3. He's a number 6 all the way. Given that his bowling is less and less useful, I'd rather they put someone with a chance of averaging 40 there.

This is honestly astonishing. Why do you keep saying this? Do you know what Shane Watson averages over the course of his career when he bats in the top 3?

 

[hendrix]

This is honestly astonishing. Why do you keep saying this? Do you know what Shane Watson averages over the course of his career when he bats in the top 3?

yes, I'm aware he has a good average up the order. I'm also think he had a good run of form and would've scored those runs from six.

 

[benchmark00]

So if he'd make runs in either positions (which hasn't be proved but let's go with it) how can you say he's not suited to the top three but instead suited to six?

 

[hendrix]

So if he'd make runs in either positions (which hasn't be proved but let's go with it) how can you say he's not suited to the top three but instead suited to six?

because he doesn't score centuries. He also gets frustrated by tight bowling and has a technical deficiency. I suppose you could say that about any batsman. I think what Australia needs is top order players who can score big and Watson isn't that. Hughes could be that, but yeah he failed. I don't know what other top order players are around.

Maybe they just don't have the talent. I thought they did a few years ago when he was asked to open. Someone else could be an established player by now.

When he's at 6 he has more of a license to play aggressively which is what I think he's good at. He also has less time to bat which means his bowling might be utilised more.

Just my opinion.

 

[benchmark00]

Everyone in the top six has the job of scoring centuries. That is such a silly reason.

Your reason should be that his game is more suited to six (which it's not) or that it would take the pressure off his batting.

Do you reckon Joe Root and George Bailey are in the team to just make 30 odds or something?

 

[hendrix]

Your reason should be that his game is more suited to six (which it's not) or that it would take the pressure off his batting.

read the rest of my post.

 

[Daemon]

because he doesn't score centuries. He also gets frustrated by tight bowling and has a technical deficiency.

What's his technical deficiency?

 

[Aritro]

I used to support England in these things but it's all getting a bit old hat now.

 

[sprintman]

Australia. Old Pommy Bastards are allowed to do that aren't they?

 

[Bushranger]

Australia as always but if we are talking players.
Siddle
Watson
Lyon
Pattinson
Finch

England
Bell
Anderson
South Africa
Amla
Steyn
West Indies
Gayle
India
No one haha
Sri Lanka
Sangakkara (best thing since my all time fav Gilly)

 

[KungFu_Kallis]

As an SA born Kiwi naturally I support those teams first (loving the Proteas new ***iness)... And had no love for either Australia or England. But the Ashes is just something else, and still takes it to another level even for the neutralite fan. I feel drawn into all the drama and feel like getting behind one side. I did use to back Eng all the way in the Ashes (mainly coz the nasty Aussie domination was so hard to take, and everyone loves an underdog).

Until at last Aus came back down to earth, and my least loved player, that yappety prat ponting finally pissed off. And Eng then started getting a bit surly and big for their boots (broad & kp just seem to be such rotten knobs at every turn) - whereupon I suddenly found myself switching sides and getting right behind Oz and Clarke, because like a fair few other fans I find their upbeat attitude and style of play a wee bit fresher and more fun to watch than the stale old poms now (in general). Feels like flawed brave man vs faulty grinding machine.

I may switch again someday like the wind. I guess that is the luxury of being a neutralander. It's funny how passionately engrossed even a neutral can get though, in following these great battles. But then is that not the charm of them Ashes

 

[Jono]

What's his technical deficiency?

Take it to the Daemon learns to cricket thread buddy.

 

[Flem274*]

Surely no one is using runs from years ago to justify the Big Front Pad with the Excellent Conversion Rate batting in the top three?

Number six ODI style hitter or bust, Kerrigan gifted tons be damned.

 

[Ray.]

Australia