-
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.
4th thread - who's going to win?
- Thread starter GIMH
- Start date
wpdavid
Hall of Fame Member
Dunno about MOTS but to be fair he did far better against SL than I'd remembered - 12 wickets at 21.5 to be precise.
It's funny how easy it is to remember some bits but miss others. I remembered that he hadn't bowled as well with the new ball at Leeds as he should have done, but I'd forgotten that he'd picked up a few later in the innings. And that he did bowl much better at Lord's.
Last edited:
GIMH
Norwood's on Fire
Have a spell
Spark
Global Moderator
England's bowling is more of a concern than their batting IMO. Not because it's terrible or anything, just because at the moment it doesn't quite look good enough and it's hard to see it getting that much better. Both Anderson and Broad are looking tired, frankly, and whilst they're still fine Test bowlers, I have a feeling that Anderson's performance in this series - looked reasonable and asked questions, didn't take many wickets - will become increasingly the norm. Broad will probably continue being Broad and continue to bowl at an objectively similar level if an infinitely more infuriating manner.
They'll be okay and cause problems, but whether they'll cause more than they did in 2013-4, I question, and they'll have to. The fact that they still show the tendency to fall apart and start mindlessly banging it short when attacked - and people talk as if Broad is the only offender, he isn't - will not have been missed. Nor will the fact that they don't have any spin options that won't be gleefully laid into by Smith, Clarke et al, exacerbating the tiredness issue even further (though Stokes helps in this regard).
Neither will the most glaring issue of all be addressed, which is that despite what some people may like to tell themselves, England still do not have any bowlers who are remotely as good as those two. Remember when England's bowling depth was the ~next big thing~? What a time that was.
They'll be okay and cause problems, but whether they'll cause more than they did in 2013-4, I question, and they'll have to. The fact that they still show the tendency to fall apart and start mindlessly banging it short when attacked - and people talk as if Broad is the only offender, he isn't - will not have been missed. Nor will the fact that they don't have any spin options that won't be gleefully laid into by Smith, Clarke et al, exacerbating the tiredness issue even further (though Stokes helps in this regard).
Neither will the most glaring issue of all be addressed, which is that despite what some people may like to tell themselves, England still do not have any bowlers who are remotely as good as those two. Remember when England's bowling depth was the ~next big thing~? What a time that was.
Last edited:
Flem274*
123/5
England once did have superb depth with fit Tremlett and Bresnan in the form of his life.
No longer.
England's only advantage is the engine room. Engine rooms work even with dukes which is interesting. The spuds in the batting of each side cancel each other out, and Australia have the better bowling attack on paper. England need to troll hard with that engine room.
But yeah as I said, Australia just.
No longer.
England's only advantage is the engine room. Engine rooms work even with dukes which is interesting. The spuds in the batting of each side cancel each other out, and Australia have the better bowling attack on paper. England need to troll hard with that engine room.
But yeah as I said, Australia just.
Lillian Thomson
Hall of Fame Member
That's not until the 4thTest. He'll have been dropped by then.
Riggins
International Captain
What's the engine room?
Tangles
International Vice-Captain
Forward pack IMO. Need a good front row.
morgieb
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Plunkett Shield for lower-middle order. Essentially bowling in New Zealand is very new ball reliant due to the fact that greentops dry out really easily and there's a lack of good spinners over there. Therefore top-order batting can be pretty tricky but middle-order batting can be a piece of piss at times.
Burgey
Request Your Custom Title Now!
I think the series will be more even than recent results for the two sides would suggest. I have a couple of reasons for saying that, primarily the return to form of Cook, which is vital for England. He's a proper run machine when he gets going, and can bat ages. Root is obviously in fine form as well. Had Voges not debuted so well in the Windies overnight, I would have said it would be even closer: assuming Rogers comes back in, he and Voges provide some much needed experience and cool-headedness in the Aussie batting, far more so than if SMarsh was a fixture.
I don't really have a problem with Australia's bowling at all. I think Lyon is better than the England spinners, and though I respect Anderson and Broad (particularly at home) I think Harris, Hazelwood and Johnson with support from Starc and whoever else can be flown in when required means we are well served for flingers.
The biggest question marks for me remain around our batting in English conditions. Warner is plainly a gun player, but he played very little over there last time through his own stupidity. Watson's gonna Watson and Clarke obviously has his back issues. Ideally, our best available XI would IMO be:
Bull
Buck
TPC
Clarkeh
16AF
Twatto/ MMarsh
Rad
MJ
Rhino
WPNCOS
Haaaaaaaaaaze
That line up has oodles of run scoring potential but is unproven. This isn't like a 93 or 01 side where you could pencil in Taylor, Boonie, the Waughs and AB for bulk runs at some point. I see it more as a side which will need to bat well as a unit. As always, the key to a batting line up is number three. Until Australia gets a consistent number three they will always feel the loss of Ponting, and not just because he was such a great. It's because one fer isn't a big deal, but two fer always is.
It was the same when Boon retired. Although Australia was still the best side in the world, the line up was prone to collapses until Ponting really found his way to consistency at three. I'm hoping TPC will do it. The bloke has become a seriously good test player now and has the game to play well in that position since he's begun leaving the ball so consistently. If you added Amla at three to that Australian side and moved the rest of the batting down a slot to omit either Voges or Watson, how good does it look? A gun number three makes a massive difference.
The really interesting series' for Australia will be after the Ashes when Rogers and presumably Haddin retire. I'd hoped Silk would have had a better summer to warrant inclusion but he didn't so the second opening spot is up for grabs, and SuperNev seems a lock for the keeping job once Haddin goes.
I don't really have a problem with Australia's bowling at all. I think Lyon is better than the England spinners, and though I respect Anderson and Broad (particularly at home) I think Harris, Hazelwood and Johnson with support from Starc and whoever else can be flown in when required means we are well served for flingers.
The biggest question marks for me remain around our batting in English conditions. Warner is plainly a gun player, but he played very little over there last time through his own stupidity. Watson's gonna Watson and Clarke obviously has his back issues. Ideally, our best available XI would IMO be:
Bull
Buck
TPC
Clarkeh
16AF
Twatto/ MMarsh
Rad
MJ
Rhino
WPNCOS
Haaaaaaaaaaze
That line up has oodles of run scoring potential but is unproven. This isn't like a 93 or 01 side where you could pencil in Taylor, Boonie, the Waughs and AB for bulk runs at some point. I see it more as a side which will need to bat well as a unit. As always, the key to a batting line up is number three. Until Australia gets a consistent number three they will always feel the loss of Ponting, and not just because he was such a great. It's because one fer isn't a big deal, but two fer always is.
It was the same when Boon retired. Although Australia was still the best side in the world, the line up was prone to collapses until Ponting really found his way to consistency at three. I'm hoping TPC will do it. The bloke has become a seriously good test player now and has the game to play well in that position since he's begun leaving the ball so consistently. If you added Amla at three to that Australian side and moved the rest of the batting down a slot to omit either Voges or Watson, how good does it look? A gun number three makes a massive difference.
The really interesting series' for Australia will be after the Ashes when Rogers and presumably Haddin retire. I'd hoped Silk would have had a better summer to warrant inclusion but he didn't so the second opening spot is up for grabs, and SuperNev seems a lock for the keeping job once Haddin goes.
Last edited:
wpdavid
Hall of Fame Member
Last edited: