Would a combined XI from this series include any England players?

[Lillian Thomson]

I think the absence of Smith was a minor clue that it was based on this series only.

 

[Starfighter]

And you're a spastic with an opinion. Congratulations.

Now **** off back to your hovel and shut up.

QED

Come back and make comments when you've actually watched the series rather than just looking at the scorecards.

 

[The Rock]

QED

Come back and make comments when you've actually watched the series rather than just looking at the scorecards.

I did and Wood is a better bowler than Boland. Fact

Boland had his moment in the sun but i've picked the better bowler. Just like you would if you weren't a ****ing spastic.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

I did and Wood is a better bowler than Boland. Fact

Boland had his moment in the sun but i've picked the better bowler. Just like you would if you weren't a ****ing spastic.

Careful there champ, don't burst a blood vessel

 

[Fuller Pilch]

I did and Wood is a better bowler than Boland. Fact

Boland had his moment in the sun but i've picked the better bowler. Just like you would if you weren't a ****ing spastic.

Calm down mate.

If you were picking better bowlers as opposed to performances in the series you'd also have to pick any of Hazlewood, Anderson, Broad, Robinson, and Richardson ahead of Wood anyway.

 

[Xix2565]

Wood was nowhere close to Boland anyway this series. Hard to say Wood's better when Boland's average is under 10 lol, it's like saying Leach was better than Axar "27 wickets at 10.59 in his debut series" Patel.

 

[Xix2565]

at least one of Broaderson.

Honestly even this is questionable to me if you want an overall combined XI when the Aussie lineup is so good anyway.

 

[Jfry]

I did and Wood is a better bowler than Boland. Fact

Boland had his moment in the sun but i've picked the better bowler. Just like you would if you weren't a ****ing spastic.

Just wondering if your some idiot who thinks Lee > Mcgrath

 

[Starfighter]

I did and Wood is a better bowler than Boland. Fact

Boland had his moment in the sun but i've picked the better bowler. Just like you would if you weren't a ****ing spastic.

Lol, Wood only put in one decent performance, in the second innings of the last test, and his first innings spell was a big contributor to England losing. All his other performances were non-influential at best.

You obviously didn't watch the series, probably because your mum was hustling you to bed early every night.

 

[SteveNZ]

I did and Wood is a better bowler than Boland. Fact

Boland had his moment in the sun but i've picked the better bowler. Just like you would if you weren't a ****ing spastic.

I love the 21st century. People write things like 'fact' or 'for certain' or 'take it as truth' behind things that are purely opinion, without any irrefutable facts to back them up.

I love Mark Wood, too, but it's pretty objective as to whether he's a 'better' bowler than Boland.

For future, combined XI from a series always relates to performances in that series alone. And if you think 17 wickets at 26 is better than 18 wickets at 9, well the only positive I can offer is that you are eminently qualified to be an England selector, but probably not much else.

 

[SteveNZ]

Lol, Wood only put in one decent performance, in the second innings of the last test, and his first innings spell was a big contributor to England losing. All his other performances were non-influential at best.

You obviously didn't watch the series, probably because your mum was hustling you to bed early every night.

I originally was going to post something along these lines, but to be fair the guy took 6-37 to bundle Australia out in the second dig so I thought it would be incredible harsh. Let's not forget his batsmen managed 188 and 124.

 

[Xix2565]

I originally was going to post something along these lines, but to be fair the guy took 6-37 to bundle Australia out in the second dig so I thought it would be incredible harsh. Let's not forget his batsmen managed 188 and 124.

He took 8 wickets at 37.625 in 3 matches overall before Hobart, and in 2 of those Australia got 400+ in an innings. He wasn't exactly contributing, like the rest of England's bowling. No need to feel bad really.

 

[Spark]

What's he going to average in coming years? it won't be 9 will it dickhead. Wood is the more threatening bowler long-term.
It's a combined 11 not a team of who did well in 3 tests you dumb prick.

oooh an internet tough guy

 

[Red]

What's he going to average in coming years? it won't be 9 will it dickhead. Wood is the more threatening bowler long-term.
It's a combined 11 not a team of who did well in 3 tests you dumb prick.

How’s your day going man?

 

[Red]

Boland > SF Barnes

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Boland simply is the first name in the bowling attack, doesn't matter he only played 3 games his impact was ridiculous. He may end up being a one series wonder like Richard Ellison in 85 but anyone suggesting he doesn't make the series side doesn't watch cricket properly or does so through rose tinted glasses.

 

[Prince EWS]

Boland simply is the first name in the bowling attack, doesn't matter he only played 3 games his impact was ridiculous. He may end up being a one series wonder like Richard Ellison in 85 but anyone suggesting he doesn't make the series side doesn't watch cricket properly or does so through rose tinted glasses.

I think some people just don't really understand the concept of a series side to begin with.

 

[Burgey]

I think The Rock made a number of salient points tbh.

 

[SteveNZ]

He took 8 wickets at 37.625 in 3 matches overall before Hobart, and in 2 of those Australia got 400+ in an innings. He wasn't exactly contributing, like the rest of England's bowling. No need to feel bad really.

That's not really fair to use that as a qualifier. Why are we referring to 'before Hobart'? Australia had a full strength batting line-up. The fact that a guy who bowls as quick as him and whole-heartedly as him was still contributing in the 5th Test, having played all but one of the series, is pretty commendable I reckon. Had Marnus on toast three innings in a row and probably had him dropped in Brisbane, I can't remember.

 

[Xix2565]

That's not really fair to use that as a qualifier. Why are we referring to 'before Hobart'? Australia had a full strength batting line-up. The fact that a guy who bowls as quick as him and whole-heartedly as him was still contributing in the 5th Test, having played all but one of the series, is pretty commendable I reckon. Had Marnus on toast three innings in a row and probably had him dropped in Brisbane, I can't remember.

Wood's commitment and speed are commendable, but in terms of quality and impact he is way down the ladder this Ashes. And I don't think it's unfair to point out he's been poor bar one innings in the series. Good bowling matters a lot more in Tests, as Australia, India, NZ, Bangladesh and SA have shown in this little period.