***Official*** Australia in England (The Ashes)

[Hoggy31]

Lol, Stuck on 49 and it's stumps..

 

[aussie]

it would be nice if Dizzy can get a 5 for tomoro

 

[King_Ponting]

Then kaspa would miss out for sure. However i believe now that gillespie has also shown he is a better batsman than kaspa, well we knew that already, combined with his extra caps as a test player, no matter how badly gillespie bowls in the second innings he will still be in the starting 11 come thursday

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Then kaspa would miss out for sure. However i believe now that gillespie has also shown he is a better batsman than kaspa, well we knew that already, combined with his extra caps as a test player, no matter how badly gillespie bowls in the second innings he will still be in the starting 11 come thursday

He was always going to be in the XI, unless Kasprowicz took a dozen wickets in this game or something.

Gillespie is really developing into an extremely useful batsman though, with three match-turning partnerships of 100+ in 2004, with Katich at Sydney, Martyn at Chennai and again in Melbourne. With Lee obviously a very useful bat and Warne having hit a pair of FC tons this season, Australia's set to have a pretty short tail.

 

[Scaly piscine]

He was always going to be in the XI, unless Kasprowicz took a dozen wickets in this game or something.

Gillespie is really developing into an extremely useful batsman though, with three match-turning partnerships of 100+ in 2004, with Katich at Sydney, Martyn at Chennai and again in Melbourne. With Lee obviously a very useful bat and Warne having hit a pair of FC tons this season, Australia's set to have a pretty short tail.

Not sure about "pretty short tail". With Lee England know they can just pepper him with endless short stuff and wait til the inevitable happens, Warne they should be getting out cheaply pretty frequently, he'll probably get lucky somewhere and get a couple of 30-40 scores but overall he's still weak for a number 8. Gillespie however will be difficult to get out, more of a problem than Lee or Warne I think mainly because they'll have to bowl a good delivery or a series of good deliveries to get rid of him, also there'll probably be someone at the other end scoring quickly and as you said he can combine to make crucial and sizeable partnerships.

 

[kendall]

The two tailes are probably fairly equaly matched with Giles maybe giving England the edge

 

[age_master]

Steve Waugh on England and Australia and their strengths and weaknesses

http://www.smh.com.au/news/cricket/waugh-on-the-poms/2005/07/16/1121455938773.html

 

[age_master]

Not sure about "pretty short tail". With Lee England know they can just pepper him with endless short stuff and wait til the inevitable happens, Warne they should be getting out cheaply pretty frequently, he'll probably get lucky somewhere and get a couple of 30-40 scores but overall he's still weak for a number 8.

they dont want to give Lee too much short stuff, as they well know hes more than capable of painful revenge. and calling Warne a weak number 8? silly.

 

[Scaly piscine]

they dont want to give Lee too much short stuff, as they well know hes more than capable of painful revenge. and calling Warne a weak number 8? silly.

Err yea, because Lee needs another reason before he bowls short stuff or extremely overpitched stuff...

Warne averages a shade over 16, that's weak for a number 8.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Not sure about "pretty short tail". With Lee England know they can just pepper him with endless short stuff and wait til the inevitable happens, Warne they should be getting out cheaply pretty frequently, he'll probably get lucky somewhere and get a couple of 30-40 scores but overall he's still weak for a number 8. Gillespie however will be difficult to get out, more of a problem than Lee or Warne I think mainly because they'll have to bowl a good delivery or a series of good deliveries to get rid of him, also there'll probably be someone at the other end scoring quickly and as you said he can combine to make crucial and sizeable partnerships.

Warne is pretty weak for a number 8 when you compare him to guys like Vettori and Giles, yeah, but he can still make a few runs when needed. Lee is a better batsman than you make him out to be though, I certainly think he's capable of being a 25+ average test player. He showed signs of it already this tour when he cracked some brilliant boundaries which were far form slogs at the end of the innings. With Gillespie's improvement, this tail is getting close to the one Australia had a few seasons back when Jason was injured and Bichel was in the team, with Warne, Bichel and Lee. Australia made some big scores then due in part to the tail consistently adding an extra hundred or so.

England have Giles who is good quality, and Hoggard who can block it, but Harmison and Jones are just sloggers really, and not as good at slogging as Warne or Lee are. I'd say at least with Lee coming into the side Australia makes up the defecit in that part of the game Giles would have caused if Kasprowicz was still there, and the tails are about equal.

 

[superkingdave]

hmm i was going to say Australia's was slightly stronger, probably due to Gillespie, but maybe they are about even, Hoggards batting has improved, i wouldn't put him *that* far behind gillespie, but lee is stronger than jones, though i'd put Harmi ahead of Mcgrath

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

hmm i was going to say Australia's was slightly stronger, probably due to Gillespie, but maybe they are about even, Hoggards batting has improved, i wouldn't put him *that* far behind gillespie, but lee is stronger than jones, though i'd put Harmi ahead of Mcgrath

Yeah, Harmison is ahead of McGrath, but the gaps between Hoggard and Gillespie and Lee and Jones are bigger in my mind, and Giles is clearly a lot better than Warne. At a pinch, I'd give Australia a slight advantage in that category, while if Kasprowicz was picked over Lee or Gillespie I'd give the advantage back to England.

Either way, my point was simply that Lee's inclusion strengthens Australia down at number 9, adding a player who is quite capable of hanging around for a dozen overs or cracking a 50 or something.

 

[greg]

for all realistic circumstances i don't see that there's much between Gillespie and Hoggard. Both are basically blockers, and both are pretty darn good at it. Gillespie edges it because he offers slightly more attacking potential in circumstances where he's batting with one of the other tailenders, but other than that not much in it.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Warne is pretty weak for a number 8 when you compare him to guys like Vettori and Giles

And also compared with SA, SL, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh generally and WI occasionally, Zimbabwe usually have a slightly weaker number 8 tho, so that's 1 out of the 9 Test nations with a regularly weaker number 8.

Lee is a better batsman than you make him out to be though, I certainly think he's capable of being a 25+ average test player.

So was Gough, but he turned out to be a bit of a rabbit in Tests in the end. If Lee does sort out his weakness against the short ball then he could indeed become a strong number 8, but it's only an if at the moment.

 

[greg]

Steve Waugh on England and Australia and their strengths and weaknesses

It's Mark Waugh, and it seems to hit most bases. Spoils it a bit with a strange point about Vaughan's 'bland' captaincy. In the one day games - yes - in tests - definitely not!

 

[PY]

Yeah, that was the only bit I didn't understand either. Seemed a little off the mark

 

[marc71178]

Lee is a better batsman than you make him out to be though, I certainly think he's capable of being a 25+ average test player.

Assuming his bowling gives him enough games to get to that level...

 

[age_master]

Err yea, because Lee needs another reason before he bowls short stuff or extremely overpitched stuff...

Warne averages a shade over 16, that's weak for a number 8.

Vettori will probably be moving up the order before long, as hes a better batsman then most of the rest of the kiwi lineup

Giles yeah maybe, but Warne has a good bowling average for a number 8, now having a good batting average or a good bowling average at number 8, which do you need more?

 

[Dasa]

Steve Waugh on England and Australia and their strengths and weaknesses

http://www.smh.com.au/news/cricket/waugh-on-the-poms/2005/07/16/1121455938773.html

That article is hilarious... Waugh may have been a good batsman, but he is as biased as anyone. By the way, the article is by Mark Waugh, not Steve.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

That article is hilarious... Waugh may have been a good batsman, but he is as biased as anyone. By the way, the article is by Mark Waugh, not Steve.

While I won't disagree Mark is a bit biased, what about that article specifically strikes you as biased? It's not hugely insightful or brilliantly written, but it's pretty much right in each of its claims as far as I can see.