England's Ashes hopes vs Australia's sure Ashes chances

[marc71178]

That's IF their heavy schedule for the last year doesn't knock out a couple of injured players.

The schedule is very bare though.

In the 5 months up to the Ashes, we have 2 games with Bangladesh.

If anything I think it's not enough.

 

[marc71178]

If they did they would drop Katich anyway and have Gilly come in at 6 and bring Lee in.

No, they would not.

That would leave a tail starting at 7.

 

[marc71178]

I am talking objextively, its just that the poms are overating themseleves as usual.

Even though the one person who's actually analysed it and given England a chance is an Aussie...

 

[Scallywag]

thorpe <----> katich
strauss <----> hayden
flintoff <----> clarke
vaughan <----> langer (or any of the above)

last of these probably most controversial, and langer doesn't deserve to be dropped, but i reckon that vaughan is a better player than langer...and probably a better captain than ponting (not saying that vaughan would captain australia).

How did you come to the conclusion that Vaughan is a better player than Langer, all the stats point in the other direction.

 

[age_master]

Flintoff could be considered ahead of Katich, Strauss against Langer, Vaughan could challenge any place in the side, etc. I'm not saying who is better but I'm considering the scenario in the following way; say Flintoff and Katich were both out of the side and it was down to them for one spot, who would win? Out of Strauss and Langer, who would win. Personally I'd pick Langer based on the fact that he's done the business for many years now but as far as raw ability goes, tough choice.

nah Katich is underrated i would take him over the all rounder (Australia doesn't really need one) Langer is better than Strauss and he bats well with hayden. Waughan? really an opener, but where could you bat him? 5 or 6 i dont think he would do as well down there....

 

[age_master]

No, they would not.

That would leave a tail starting at 7.

and we would still have a better batting lineup than England

 

[vic_orthdox]

How did you come to the conclusion that Vaughan is a better player than Langer, all the stats point in the other direction.

its just a belief, considering that
- vaughan performed so admirably last time that he faced the best going around.
- its an average of 44 for vaughan to 46 for langer, so it isn't that great a discrepancy.
- before vaughan was captain, he was averaging 51 in 30 tests.
- and personally, i believe that vaughan is technically more proficient than langer and better equipped to handle the best bowling. i think the lack of quality openers who swing the ball has allowed langer to open as successfully as he has, coupled with the dominating presence of hayden at the other end. wouldn't be suprised if hoggard has him for breakfast in the ashes, though.

 

[Top_Cat]

nah Katich is underrated i would take him over the all rounder (Australia doesn't really need one) Langer is better than Strauss and he bats well with hayden. Waughan? really an opener, but where could you bat him? 5 or 6 i dont think he would do as well down there....

Nah mate, you missed the point. The point isn't to say 'who's better than the other?'. The question was asked, which of the English players would make an Aussie Test team and all I was saying is that they have a few. I personally would pick Katich too, I don't see how you can say whp's better out of Strauss/Langer (Langer has beena great player for Australia for a few years now but to compare Strauss at such an early stage in his career is unfair on him. Again, personally, I'd still pick Langer). Vaughan is as good a player as any of the Aussies (with Ponting possibly just edging him out in the pure destruction stakes).

 

[Scallywag]

its just a belief, considering that
- vaughan performed so admirably last time that he faced the best going around.
- its an average of 44 for vaughan to 46 for langer, so it isn't that great a discrepancy.
- before vaughan was captain, he was averaging 51 in 30 tests.
- and personally, i believe that vaughan is technically more proficient than langer and better equipped to handle the best bowling. i think the lack of quality openers who swing the ball has allowed langer to open as successfully as he has, coupled with the dominating presence of hayden at the other end. wouldn't be suprised if hoggard has him for breakfast in the ashes, though.

Langer has far more centuries, fifties and catches per match than Vaughan and has performed over a longer period than Vaughan, Langer has faced the same lack of quality openers who swing the ball as Vaughan and came out better.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Langer has faced the same lack of quality openers who swing the ball as Vaughan and came out better

well, as an opener, vaughan has an average of 49 over 31 matches.

 

[Zinzan]

its just a belief, considering that
- vaughan performed so admirably last time that he faced the best going around.
- its an average of 44 for vaughan to 46 for langer, so it isn't that great a discrepancy.
- before vaughan was captain, he was averaging 51 in 30 tests.
- and personally, i believe that vaughan is technically more proficient than langer and better equipped to handle the best bowling. i think the lack of quality openers who swing the ball has allowed langer to open as successfully as he has, coupled with the dominating presence of hayden at the other end. wouldn't be suprised if hoggard has him for breakfast in the ashes, though.

Put it this way.....I'd much rather have Langer bat for my life than Vaughan.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Langer has far more centuries, fifties and catches per match than Vaughan

- the futility of the catches per match statistic is further enhanced by the fact that there is .05 catches per match between the two.
- vaughan has a better conversion rate than langer.
- its just a personal opinion, one which can not be unequivocally be dismissed through statistics.
- and overall its a bit like a giles versus vettori argument. do you take someone who has performed reasonably against all teams, or the one who has performed optimally against the best in the world? for me, i take vettori and vaughan.

 

[Steulen]

well, as an opener, vaughan has an average of 49 over 31 matches.

As an opener, Langer has an average of 51.58 from 83 innings

 

[vic_orthdox]

As an opener, Langer has an average of 51.58 from 83 innings

haha. i'll cop that. should have bothered to find out what langers stat was before using vaughans. ah well, can't change old habits, i.e. laziness.

Put it this way.....I'd much rather have Langer bat for my life than Vaughan.

Can understand why your saying that, and why many other people would too. I'm not professing to being completely right, I may well be quite the opposite, however, AFAIC its a comparison between two pretty even players, and i think its not unreasonable for me to believe that Vaughan is the better of the two.

There are so many arguments that both of us could use, (e.g. batsman friendly conditions in australia/well then vaughans effort in australia isn't that grand/but vaughan is captaining his country...etc.) and it could turn into a TEC-Richard thread, but nothing will be achieved out of it.

 

[Zinzan]

haha. i'll cop that. should have bothered to find out what langers stat was before using vaughans. ah well, can't change old habits, i.e. laziness.


Can understand why your saying that, and why many other people would too. I'm not professing to being completely right, I may well be quite the opposite, however, AFAIC its a comparison between two pretty even players, and i think its not unreasonable for me to believe that Vaughan is the better of the two.

There are so many arguments that both of us could use, (e.g. batsman friendly conditions in australia/well then vaughans effort in australia isn't that grand/but vaughan is captaining his country...etc.) and it could turn into a TEC-Richard thread, but nothing will be achieved out of it.

fair enough that you have that view...Your right that its not totally clear that Langer is a far better player and i definately think Vaughan is more elegant to watch. But the main reason I'd take Langer is that he seem to sell his wicket for a much higher price thus is more dependable

 

[kendall]

I think a combined side would be something like
1.Strauss
2.Langer (unless vaughan on the form he showed a couple of years ago)
3.Ponting
4.Martyn
5.Thorpe
6.Flintoff
7.Gilchrist
8.Warne
9.Gillespie
10.Harmisson (if on form)
11.Mcgrath
This shows the obvious that Australia on paper are comtorbly better than England

The three players that put a big gap between the two sides are Gilchrist,Mcgrath and Warne. if even one of these 3 are injured it gives England a chance. When Australia were without mcgath and warne agaisnt India they could only manage a draw. Although India batting line up was stronger than Englands they do have home advantage and a better bowling atack then India. If Australia are not full strength then they are not invincible and England have a resonable chance.

 

[marc71178]

and we would still have a better batting lineup than England

I would debate that if you had any of the 5 coming in at 7.

 

[Swervy]

fair enough that you have that view...Your right that its not totally clear that Langer is a far better player and i definately think Vaughan is more elegant to watch. But the main reason I'd take Langer is that he seem to sell his wicket for a much higher price thus is more dependable

that is spot on..I think Vaughan has the ability to be amongst the very best in the world, but it beggers belief sometimes the way he throws his wicket away early on

 

[biased indian]

The schedule is very bare though.

In the 5 months up to the Ashes, we have 2 games with Bangladesh.

If anything I think it's not enough.

so when is ashes in Aug-Sep

 

[biased indian]

The schedule is very bare though.

In the 5 months up to the Ashes, we have 2 games with Bangladesh.

If anything I think it's not enough.

and if iam correct Aus doesnt play any test before that .that what i heard yesterday smith say that McGrath will arrive in England on 499