***Official*** 3rd Test at the WACA

[Fiery]

So how many #8's around the world would you say are all rounders?

Kumble? Warne?

#8 should be able to hold a bat, I don't know who expects an all rounder at #8. If they were an all rounder, they'd bat at 6 or 7.

Pollock, Vaas, Vettori, Ramdin are all all rounders. Warne is a good enough player to be classed as all rounder. A good team should have an all rounder at 8 otherwise the tail is too long. Just my opinion

 

[Tomm NCCC]

Yeah, it's the teeth 'innit'?

Oh ouch. Just Ouch. Right there man. That got me. Right in my teeth. Ouch, man.

 

[marc71178]

Why should England just settle for a keeper who is just capable with the gloves, pay no attention to what he does with the bat, when there is so much quality in the batting & bowling?.

Don't understand what you mean here?

My comment is based on Prior not even reaching "capable" with the gloves yet having a fair number of people call for his selection because he was scoring runs.

I admit to still being a purist and wanting a proper wicketkeeper to be picked, but appreciate that that doesn't happen very often any more, however I can't be alone in at least wanting a decent keeper, rather than a batsman who's given the gloves as the best of a bad lot.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Jones is a reall frustrating case, because he obviously can bat, just rarely does. I will always remember him playing a magnificent slog shot against McGrath in the Ashes 2005, flying for 6 miles into mid-wicket.

 

[marc71178]

It's quite funny how they classify Mahmood as an allrounder in England with a first class batting average of 15

Nobody in their right mind classes him as an all rounder.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Just a pretty good bowler who can a small bit, better than most bowlers.

 

[shortpitched713]

Haha. Not much faith I c

Considering I am rooting for Australia.

 

[Fiery]

Nobody in their right mind classes him as an all rounder.

Yeah, I got that one wrong I admit.

 

[marc71178]

Dare say that Monty isn't too far behind Giles as a batsman.

Is that why Giles bats 6 or 7 in County Cricket?

 

[howardj]

I'd make this XI slight favourites for 2009 (with home advantage) but it will depend on Australia's bowlers. I reckon Australia will always have good batsmen but the key for them will be if Tait and/or Johnson make the grade, will MacGill still be playing, or if not how on earth will they replace Warne? About as easily as we replaced Botham IMO - we are talking a once-in-a-lifetime player here.

Yeah I think, with the retirement of many stalwart Australian players, that the Ashes will change hands a few times over the next few Series, with the home side emerging the victor. No doubt McGrath and Warne will be harder to replace than say Langer and Hayden. Though I'd say Warne will still be wearing the creams in 2009, while the other aforementioned chaps (and you can include MacGill in that lot) won't be. But yeah, when he goes, Warne can't be replaced.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Giles has one List-A hundred and 3 FC hundreds, off the top of my head, may be wrong though. The List-A one is very impressive, they are a lot more difficult than FC ones, many good batsmen never got one. Bradman didn't. Bradman < Giles.

 

[marc71178]

Pollock, Vaas, Vettori, Ramdin are all all rounders.

Pollock maybe, the others are more than questionable.

 

[shortpitched713]

England's biggest problem so far this series has been their inability to bowl with potency consistently over any period of time. Last Ashes series they wondue to their bowling, even if their batting wasn't so flash. This time around besides for Hoggard and now Panesar their frontline bowling has been inconsistent, and the fourth seamer has been rubbish. Personally I don't see any point in England playing any bowlers besides Hoggard, Flintoff, Harmison, and Panesar, but as this series has proved, thats simply not good enough against the Aussies. Simon Jones may or may not make any difference.

 

[Fiery]

Pollock maybe, the others are more than questionable.

Vettori is, without question, an all rounder. If a bowler or keeper averages in the mid 20s with the bat I think you can call them an all rounder. A very good allrounder will average more than 30 with the bat and less than 30 with the ball.

 

[shortpitched713]

Problem is, England have tried that route mate. Obviously it would be nice if you had a number 8 that could bat, but its definitely not the be all end all. If your top order batsmen can perform consistently then that really shouldn't be an issue.

 

[howardj]

Ricky Ponting has been insane this Ashes. Wants them back more than any other man without a doubt.
.

Oh for sure. Ponting has been like a famished dinosaur this Series. So hungry. The losing of the Ashes was humiliating for him - he knows that whatever he achieves for the remainder of his career, that will always be a permanent stain on his copybook. The only elixir for that sort of feeling is a 5-0 crushing. And I'm sure that's what his goal is. He wants to make them suffer (at least cricket-wise) like he did. I've seen him bat better than he is now, but never with more determination.

 

[Fiery]

Problem is, England have tried that route mate. Obviously it would be nice if you had a number 8 that could bat, but its definitely not the be all end all. If your top order batsmen can perform consistently then that really shouldn't be an issue.

I wouldn't select a test team with 4 bowlers that can't bat. Runs down the order are just as important as those at the top really

 

[age_master]

Oh for sure. Ponting has been like a famished dinosaur this Series. So hungry. The losing of the Ashes was humiliating for him - he knows that whatever he achieves for the remainder of his career, that will always be a permanent stain on his copybook. The only elixir for that sort of feeling is a 5-0 crushing. And I'm sure that's what his goal is. He wants to make them suffer (at least cricket-wise) like he did. I've seen him bat better than he is now, but never with more determination.

yep, he looks like he wants to bat all test every time he goes out there.

 

[howardj]

I wouldn't select a test team with 4 bowlers that can't bat. Runs down the order are just as important as those at the top really

Wickets are the most important thing from guys 8-11. Like you shouldn't be picking an inferior bowler because he's going to squeeze out an extra 8-10 runs an innings.

 

[Fiery]

Wickets are the most important thing from guys 8-11. Like you shouldn't be picking an inferior bowler because he's going to squeeze out an extra 8-10 runs an innings.

I suppose you're right about that but England don't seem to be getting enough of them (wickets) at the moment.