Ashes head to head - 100 days to go

[benchmark00]

LOL at marc comparing Read and Gilchrist.

 

[andyc]

I really don't see why everyone is classing Hussey so far ahead of Bell. I know Bell had a nightmare in the Ashes, but he is so much more confident now.

I'm gonna stick my neck out. Bell to average more than Hussey in the Ashes - and if he doesn't I'll put Hussey in my avatar for a month.

Should probably post that in the Avatar Challenge thread. But I'm more than confident in saying Hussey will average more, given that he's prospered in England, against English bowlers for years.

 

[GIMH]

Should probably post that in the Avatar Challenge thread. But I'm more than confident in saying Hussey will average more, given that he's prospered in England, against English bowlers for years.

Done

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I really don't see why everyone is classing Hussey so far ahead of Bell. I know Bell had a nightmare in the Ashes, but he is so much more confident now.

I'm gonna stick my neck out. Bell to average more than Hussey in the Ashes - and if he doesn't I'll put Hussey in my avatar for a month.

Probably the same reason all the English people are writing off Gilchrist, I suppose. Both had a horror time last series, and so people expect them to do so again.

 

[Sanz]

But the difference is :-
a. Australia are playing @ Home
b. Australia are going to be full strength, England are not.

 

[greg]

But the difference is :-
a. Australia are playing @ Home
b. Australia are going to be full strength, England are not.

If England decide that a 4 man attack is the way to go then England will be at full strength. If a 5 man attack then probably not.

 

[Sanz]

I was talking more in terms of Jones, Giles and Freddie not fit for the series, hence not at full strength.

 

[greg]

I was talking more in terms of Jones, Giles and Freddie not fit for the series, hence not at full strength.

Freddie will be fit and Giles wouldn't get in the team. Certainly not in the context of improving England's bowling attack.

 

[GIMH]

But the difference is :-
a. Australia are playing @ Home
b. Australia are going to be full strength, England are not.

If, after last year's Ashes, I'd have been told we'd be without Simon Jones and Michael Vaughan for the next Ashes, I'd have been pretty devastated. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not happy that they won't be there, but I'm confident that we can go over there and give the Aussies a good fight for our urn, because we have good players. And if we go with a 4-man attack, then we're going in with 4 wicket-takers. Unless any more injuries pop up, I'm not worried about the injury situation, nor am i worried about being away from home. Australia are the best team in the world (yes, yes, that probably is the first time I've ever admitted that) and it will take a monumental effort to even draw the series, but too many people are writing us off. We aren't ranked #2 in the world for no reason. Looking back through old posts yesterday morning, I noticed that prior to last year's Ashes noone gave us a chance then either. It can be done.

 

[BoyBrumby]

If one was selecting an Anglo-Oz XI I think yer crims would be in the majority fairly comfortably. Going on players expected to be fit for The Ashes (i.e. no Jonah or Vaughan) I think you'd perhaps have 3 Poms at worst, maybe 5 at (absolute) best.

I think Freddie would be there (no-brainer), you'd probably take KP ahead of Martyn & Hoggy ahead of Lee or Clark, but they'd be the only guarantees for mine. Cases can be made for Cook over Langer & Harmy over Lee or Clark, but I don't think anyone would say they're anything other than marginal calls.

Mind you, at the start of 2005 very few Poms would've made a select either (Fred for Katich, Hoggy for Lee, probably Vaughan for Clarke & maybe Strauss for Hayden), so it isn't necessarily all about the players; the team, the coach & the captaincy all count too.

 

[steds]

Some pretty stupid calls there. Cook and Langer is okay, but Gilchrist definitely>Read, Hussey>Bell, and there is no question at all that McGrath>Hoggard.

Swap the Cook/Langer and Hussey/Bell calls in quoted sentence for my opinion.

 

[Salamuddin]

Australia's batting is unquestionably vastly superior to England's.

I think the bowling attacks are 55-45 to Australia in Australian conditions.

 

[Laurrz]

Australia's batting is unquestionably vastly superior to England's.

I think the bowling attacks are 55-45 to Australia in Australian conditions.

wow this is nice hearing from a pakistani

but i dunno i think our batting is prone to middle order collapses and englands is pretty solid looking atm.... i reckon 50-50 for batting ... with Warne and Lee yea i'll make it 55-45

for the bowling i think Australia are far better off as they are good at bowling on their bouncy wickets, and they don't move around as much as in england .... so England will be tested... i say 55-45 to aus again in bowling

 

[Slow Love™]

Didn't Gilly score a century in Bangla when rest of his teammates couldn't pass 25 ?

Yeah, that was a brilliant innings, but because of who it was against, it'll be automatically given little value in 99% of the discussions on this forum and others, because people habitually rate only who the opposition was rather than the context of an innings and how it was played.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

I cant wait until the Ashes. I will be watching every minute of it. Apart from when i am at school when i will just take a portable radio. Lol

For some reason I find the above very funny.

 

[luffy]

For some reason I find the above very funny.

Why is that??

 

[Pedro Delgado]

Just the way it's worded.

Humour an old man.