*Official* Second Test at the Adelaide Oval

[flibbertyjibber]

they'll probably just play bres

Yep, can see that happening.

 

[Pothas]

Right thing to do as well (long as he is fit). Nothing I would love more come Perth than England playing Curtly Ambrose reincarnate but I don't think that is going to happen.

Actually **** it lets just call up Tymal Mills.

 

[Woodster]

Right thing to do as well (long as he is fit). Nothing I would love more come Perth than England playing Curtly Ambrose reincarnate but I don't think that is going to happen.

Actually **** it lets just call up Tymal Mills.

Mills shook up the England side when Essex played them in the summer. The signs were already there that a left-arm quick can cause us sufficient problems, even one as erratic as Johnson.

 

[hendrix]

Are Bird, Pattinson et al likely to be at all fit for the second test?

I don't think Johnson will be so effective at Adelaide (obviously).

 

[Top_Cat]

Has bowled well there every time he's played on AO. You don't need to just bowl dry stuff to bowl well there if you've got the right guys at the other end.

Also, lost in the Johnson hoopla is that Harris got Cook caught behind yet again. No matter what Johnson serves up next time, even a plum AO won't stop Harris from being threatening in the same way.

 

[Justo]

Aye. Harris is the key to the attack. Pretty sure he's taken at least one wicket with every new ball since his return to the side.

I'm pretty sure that Pattinson and Bird won't be available until Perth. If they are available for Adelaide chances are they won't get any Shield games beforehand so I don't see them being selected based on that (and the form of the other bowlers).

Either way I think Adelaide could be a good contest. England will try to come back strong and favourable batting conditions will probably suit both sides. KP is also likely to go big since he has every other time he's been there.

 

[benchmark00]

Clarkeatron's record at Adelaide is peachy too isn't it?

 

[hendrix]

Has bowled well there every time he's played on AO. You don't need to just bowl dry stuff to bowl well there if you've got the right guys at the other end.

Also, lost in the Johnson hoopla is that Harris got Cook caught behind yet again. No matter what Johnson serves up next time, even a plum AO won't stop Harris from being threatening in the same way.

Yeah, I made this point in the Mitch Johnson thread.

There's much less pressure on him now that Harris and Siddle are the real leaders of the attack. I think Johnson's always going to struggle against a batsman like Cook because he simply doesn't have the accuracy required. Harris and Siddle do though.

 

[Ruckus]

Yeah Harris is so, so important to our attack. It makes such a difference to have a genuinely good, consistent wicket taking bowler as the leader of the attack (as opposed to what we used to have in Hilf, Siddle and Johnson). Such an asset is Harris, long may he stay fit.

 

[adub]

Yeah Harris is so, so important to our attack. It makes such a difference to have a genuinely good, consistent wicket taking bowler as the leader of the attack (as opposed to what we used to have in Hilf, Siddle and Johnson). Such an asset is Harris, long may he stay fit.

Amen

 

[wiff]

Going by recent encounters, whoever wins the toss has got best chance of winning.

1st Test at Nottingham
Toss England, who chose to bat

2nd Test at Lord’s -
Toss England, who chose to bat

4th Test at Chester-le-Street
Toss England, who chose to bat

1st Test, Brisbane
Toss Australia, who chose to bat

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Root or Bell to 3?

Stokes to 6 I guess to give extra bowling option.

 

[hendrix]

Would put Root at 3 given that he's opened recently and it involves the least re-jigging (other than Ballance coming in at 3 which I suppose is also an option but not really).

 

[Maximas]

I would have thought Root goes into 3 given his experience as an opener, but Bell may well be the bloke best equipped for the job, Ballance, Bairstow and Stokes fighting it out for no 6 then?

 

[Red]

Speculation: If we win in Adelaide, and Bailey doesn't contribute, is it time to think about a younger batsman at #6?

Maddinson or Doolan?

I know Bailey's only had one test, but there were question marks over his suitability for tests from the outset, in spite of his ODI form. And I think his leadership was a major part of his selection.

If we get into an impregnable position in the series, I'd love to see us blood someone young-ish at #6.

 

[Spikey]

struggle to see Bailey being dropped until after the Perth test, despite what everyone on here would do

 

[Dan]

I would have thought Root goes into 3 given his experience as an opener, but Bell may well be the bloke best equipped for the job, Ballance, Bairstow and Stokes fighting it out for no 6 then?

Get Compton on a plane, get him into the Performance Programme game vs QLD 2nds, then bring him in at 3. Better suited to the top order than Bell, more likely to make runs than Ballance, Bairstow or Stokes.

 

[Red]

struggle to see Bailey being dropped until after the Perth test, despite what everyone on here would do

Yeh, fair. What about if we're 3 nil up after Perth and Bailey hasn't done much?

 

[NUFAN]

At Adelaide I would now go:

1 Carberry 2 Cook 3 Root 4 Pietersen 5 Bell 6 Stokes 7 Prior 8 Broad 9 Swann 10 Anderson 11 Panesar

 

[Spikey]

Would the likely slow pitch suit Monty though? Like, I'm not expecting much zip off the pitch there.