Jack Leach out of the Ashes

[Burgey]

He didn't get many wickets, but if Potts bowled a bit fuller than he did against Ireland I think he'd go well. Tongue got the results but i don't know if his MO would bother Aus all that much tbh.

It's just a massive risk playing Broad, Anderson and Robinson when two of them are old and two of them are coming off injuries. They'll probably be fine, and if they play I hope they are because injuries blow no matter who gets them, but it's a big roll pf the dice without an all rounder to step in if one of them gets hurt and a spinner to bowl bulk overs.

 

[Ashes81]

He didn't get many wickets, but if Potts bowled a bit fuller than he did against Ireland I think he'd go well. Tongue got the results but i don't know if his MO would bother Aus all that much tbh.

It's just a massive risk playing Broad, Anderson and Robinson when two of them are old and two of them are coming off injuries. They'll probably be fine, and if they play I hope they are because injuries blow no matter who gets them, but it's a big roll pf the dice without an all rounder to step in if one of them gets hurt and a spinner to bowl bulk overs.

If there's any injury doubts over Robinson or Anderson then they shouldn't play.

The noise from the England camp is both have had minor knocks and will be fine. Assuming that's correct, I'd be surprised if they don't play. It will then be a shout between, Woakes, Wood and Potts for the last spot if they go with 4 seamers.

If they bring another spinner in then it's a big risk, we simply don't have anyone of the required standard and experience.

Its either a punt on Ahmed, going back to Mo or Rashid, or going to Liam Dawson.

I think the Aussies would hit any of them out of the attack.

It's a real shame for the series that we've got these issues as it shifts the balance very much in the Aussie's favour.

 

[Molehill]

He didn't get many wickets, but if Potts bowled a bit fuller than he did against Ireland I think he'd go well. Tongue got the results but i don't know if his MO would bother Aus all that much tbh.

It's just a massive risk playing Broad, Anderson and Robinson when two of them are old and two of them are coming off injuries. They'll probably be fine, and if they play I hope they are because injuries blow no matter who gets them, but it's a big roll pf the dice without an all rounder to step in if one of them gets hurt and a spinner to bowl bulk overs.

It's worth looking at the timins of the Tests. Test 1 is like a one off whilst 2/3 and 4/5 are back to back. You'd therefore think the Big 3 would certainly all play the First Test given there's a week off before the 2nd. It's the back to back ones where they may consider chopping and changing.

 

[Burgey]

Another complicating factor is if you want to bat ultra aggressively then you don't want too much sideways movement, because you want to pick the first line and be able to hit through it. But if you're going to rely on that sort of all seam attack, you'll want a decent amount of sideways, but it'll mess with you're batting line up. Four x RFM on a flattish deck gets pretty same-same

 

[ataraxia]

Another complicating factor is if you want to bat ultra aggressively then you don't want too much sideways movement, because you want to pick the first line and be able to hit through it. But if you're going to rely on that sort of all seam attack, you'll want a decent amount of sideways, but it'll mess with you're batting line up. Four x RFM on a flattish deck gets pretty same-same

Australia winning is just a foregone conclusion, right?

 

[Burgey]

They'll have to choke pretty hard not to, but that was the case before the injures in any event. England's batting was always too limited to cope with Australia's bowling on anything which offers decent movement, while England's attack needs something with decent movement in it to get the better of Australia's batting. I called that conundrum for England months ago.

I'd still rather no injuries though, to anyone.

 

[Ashes81]

I've always thought for England to win, we needed things to go in our favour - injuries, win the vital tosses etc.

The plan, bowling wise, was obviously to rotate Archer/Wood/Stone and play 2 of Jimmy, Broad, Robinson, Woakes, Potts.

Stokes would be the 4th seamer with Leach providing the spin option.

However, the plan has gone up in smoke. Stokes is obviously struggling, Leach and Archer are out and Stone is injured.

All is obviously not lost as a ball hasn't been bowled yet and who knows what may happen injury wise etc as the series progresses, but it's a real shame that 3 key players for us - Archer, Leach and Stokes are crocked.

 

[Burgey]

Stokes is the linchpin, isn't he? It just gives you so much flexibility to have a proper fifth bowler, and even though he'll have days where he won't have to bowl at all, he is also capable of bowling some decently long spells when he's fully fit. It just ties it all together.

 

[honestbharani]

Another one to blame Root for IMO. He loves overbowling his seamers, including Stokes in India of all places.

 

[Burgey]

He certainly has questions to answer.

 

[Jarquis]

Stokes seemingly loves that himself though.

Have NFI who we are going to pick or who we should pick. Probably Woakes tbh.

 

[Burgey]

Stokes needs to make sure he doesn't try to remedy this situation and over bowl himself into a proper injury, which would genuinely **** things up, series-wise.

 

[Burgey]

Stokes seemingly loves that himself though.

Have NFI who we are going to pick or who we should pick. Probably Woakes tbh.

Yeah he's probably your best bet isn't he, from a depth-adding pov to the batting.

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

Stokes is the linchpin, isn't he? It just gives you so much flexibility to have a proper fifth bowler, and even though he'll have days where he won't have to bowl at all, he is also capable of bowling some decently long spells when he's fully fit. It just ties it all together.

Yeah he makes a big difference. A lot of the bowling he does (when fit) is with the old ball and he can put together a spell of bouncers when needed which is a role you don't want e.g. Anderson having to do. So he's important on flat decks especially ...which is apparently what he's requested for the Ashes.

I think with him struggling and Leach out we have to go the 4 quicks route. So Anderson/Robinson/Wood and probably Broad unless they want Woakes' extra batting.

 

[ataraxia]

Woakes + Dawson seems reasonable; or if Stokes is bowling 5 seamers, including Woakes. Doubt either of those situations will emerge, however.

 

[Starfighter]

Another one to blame Root for IMO. He loves overbowling his seamers, including Stokes in India of all places.

If he wanted to, Stokes would bowl himself until he keeled over, get up, and keep bowling.

Also, I remember an article that appeared before the 2019 Ashes, after Langer said Australia would try tire him out, where Archer boasted about how many overs he bowled for Sussex and that he couldn't be tired out. In any case if he bowled as little as people suggested he'd have been taken off long before he had his famous pop at Smith, which was well into a long spell.

 

[Burgey]

Gotta say Woakes at eight has the potential to be a genuine pain the arse for our blokes. Broad has a habit of slogging a few too, but Woakes is a lot more likely obviously.

 

[Starfighter]

Woakes + Dawson seems reasonable; or if Stokes is bowling 5 seamers, including Woakes. Doubt either of those situations will emerge, however.

Who are you leaving out of the Old Firm or the fat racist in that scenario?

 

[Pothas]

Would much rather they just go Anderson, Broad, Robinson and Wood and just deal with the fact that Root is the spinner.

Those 4 look really strong as a pace attack and makes Stokes not bowling less of a problem.

 

[Burgey]

Woakes + Dawson seems reasonable; or if Stokes is bowling 5 seamers, including Woakes. Doubt either of those situations will emerge, however.

I think if Stokes is bowling they'd definitely play a spinner. 5 seamers seems a massive overkill.