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

[Top_Cat]

Yes I think Gillys success rate of hitting a ton in the first Test of a series would be just about the best of all time?

Michael Slater maybe?

Lets not forget that he also has to keep wicket, which must be very enervating especially in India.

Indeed, that's an important point. Gilly has to keep as well, further inducing fatigue.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Didnt you just say that his form had deteriorated markedly since 2001.

Funny how that coincides with the period where he's only been picked sporadically. Makes you think that it may not have been in his favour.

No no, you don't understand. A bowler doesn't care about playing opportunities or representing their country or chances to improve or anything. The only thing they care about is their stats, and because Macgill has been so terrible since he hit his wall of mediocrity in 2001 he would not have wanted to be picking knowing his shocking performance would ruin his stats, and as such he would be relieved by his sporadic appearances for Australia, knowing that he would finish his career with a lower average than he deserved. Richard knows this.

 

[marc71178]

It is unlikely to happen especially as Watson is not in the squad. If it does I would not be so worried. Warne is handy and Gillespie has been a rock over the last 2-3 years. The 9, 10 and 11 aren't much but if you are banking on them scoring runs then you're in trouble.

Good point, but to get Tait in, he was suggesting 1 injured and going with 4 seam, meaning that one of Lee, McGrath, Gillespie, Kasprowicz is out to be replaecd by Tait, add Warne and that tail gives opposition a boost!

 

[marc71178]

Interesting note; Thorpe's first ton came in his first Test and almost gave England a win in 1993 (I saw that knock; was a fantastically confident knock from a guy playing his first Test) and his third was pivotal in partnership with Hussain in annihilating Australia in the 1st Test in 1997. I guess that's why he's persisted with as much as he is; scores hundreds which do most to win games.

I think he's been persisted with more because he's our best batsman.

 

[King_Ponting]

agreed that thorpe is Englands best proven batsman in the current squad. Thorpe will have a much easy time against the Aussies this time round as Lee is not in the intial 11. I remeber a match played in Australia when thrope last played here where Lee got into a fiery spell of bowling and broke Thorpes thumb. If Lee was in the starting 11 maybe Thorpe would have more difficulty facing him because of that incident?

 

[Top_Cat]

I think he's been persisted with more because he's our best batsman.

Yes but whilst he had his personal problems, it would have been easy for the English selectors to not pick him again. Best batsman or not, I would imagine that had he been an Aussie, he wouldn't be picked to play at 35.

 

[cameeel]

I dont know about that, Australia doesnt seem to have a problem with playing old players, Lehmann has only recently stopped playing internationally, steve waugh played until he was 35 and Glenn McGrath is 30 something

 

[chaminda_00]

I dont know about that, Australia doesnt seem to have a problem with playing old players, Lehmann has only recently stopped playing internationally, steve waugh played until he was 35 and Glenn McGrath is 30 something

Yeah but that just proves TC point, Waugh and Lehmann both got focused to retire at 35 and Thorpe would be the same.

 

[cameeel]

true, but you need to play your best players regardless of age, especially in a showcase series such as the ashes

 

[Top_Cat]

true, but you need to play your best players regardless of age, especially in a showcase series such as the ashes

Sure Thorpe has previously been England's best batsman but is he now? I have my doubts.

 

[chaminda_00]

Sure Thorpe has previously been England's best batsman but is he now? I have my doubts.

Well he has averages over 50 in the last two years, i would still say his their best batsmen.

 

[cameeel]

Possibly notm but if he's a proven performer than it makes sense to give him the opportunity

 

[Mister Wright]

and of course it isnt possible that they won both those series because their bowling was far ahead of the opposition's?

Yet Australia were behind on the first innings in all three test. That means that the batsman would have had to put up a good fight in the 2nd innings when the pitches would have been more suited to spin bowling.

 

[Scallywag]

Ponting will be the highest ICC ranked batsman playing in the ashes series followed by Martyn, Gilchrist, Strauss, Langer, Hayden & Trescothic.

 

[andyc]

classic warne, this
'Warne nicknames Pietersen '600''
http://content.cricinfo.com/engvaus/content/story/208997.html

 

[Magrat Garlick]

classic warne, this
'Warne nicknames Pietersen '600''
http://content.cricinfo.com/engvaus/content/story/208997.html

As much as I wish Warne to go nought for 941 in the series, you gotta appreciate that ****iness...

 

[Link]

Pietersen might not even make the ashes the way he is going on. highest score of 60 something and besides that not anything to be proud of, Warne may have to wait untill the next ashes, it breaks my heart to say

 

[aussie]

oh wait, i didnt claim that all their players were poor against spin
and of course it isnt possible that they won both those series because their bowling was far ahead of the opposition's?
QUOTE]

Both this and top cat's point were reasons why australia won in both India & Sri lanka tec

 

[aussie]

yes they were, because players like katich, martyn, lehmann and clarke all stepped up.
but it would be ludicrous to say that the aussie batting was better than SLs or indias, its just that they had better bowlers.

clarke had one outstanding series, we'll see what hes going to do in the future.
and ponting isnt anything special on a turner, and gilchrist is very very poor against spin anywhere in the world.
QUOTE]

what do you mean the aussies batter wasn't better than neither IND or SRI?, they had bigger totals than both of them in the respective series so i don't really understand what you mean by that.

Agreed Gilchrist isn't techinically capable to handle top quality spinners but he has had his moments againts them.

 

[aussie]

Well he has averages over 50 in the last two years, i would still say his their best batsmen.

on recent form it would surely be strauss