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

[marc71178]

Should be an even contest then as Eng have selected a bowler that cant bowl (Giles), an all-rounder that's not much good at anything (Collingwood), a batsman that cant bat (Bell) and a keeper .........

If Giles is a bowler that can't bat then Australia have 4 of them.

Collingwood won't play.

Bell's got a lot of good balls this series.

And talking of keepers...

 

[social]

If Giles is a bowler that can't bat then Australia have 4 of them.

Collingwood won't play.

Bell's got a lot of good balls this series.

And talking of keepers...

Huh? Whats Giles not being able to bat got to do with him averaging 50 with the ball for bugger-all wickets.

So, if Colly doesnt play you select Anderson

Bell's average of 20 doesnt lie

Gilchrist hasnt scored any runs but at least he can catch

 

[Mister Wright]

Gilchrist hasnt scored any runs but at least he can catch

That's debatable.

 

[SquidAU]

Someone has to get a hundred for Australia in this Test....and make it an extra large one!

Ponting winning the toss tonight will help.

 

[pskov]

I think England should choos Anderson over Collingwood for as much psychological reasons as anything. Selecting Anderson shows the same attitude, picking a side of four quicks to really trouble the opposition and take the attack to them. Collingwood would be the 'saftey first' option, but a) that can backfire as seen plenty of times in the past, the extra bat does not automatically guarentee a good total, and b) it sends a negative message both to the Aussies that we aren't as confident as we should be having outplayed them 3 tests in a row and also to our own players that the selectors and coach don't think we can win without having a 'just in case' guy. Of course, the message would be inadvertent, but that is irrelevant. 2-1 up and playing the better cricket, we should be positive, look to win at the Oval and bury the series once and for all.

If the Aussies win the toss, bat and get off to a good start, say 240-3 at tea, I'd rather have an extra quick to help the attack than a guy who bowls dibby dobber medium pace (but don't worry, he can bat a bit too!). I think Anderson has a lot of talent, anyone who saw him down under in 2003 and at the World Cup couldn't deny that. However, as he has shown since then he is also very raw. He has had a solid year of county cricket (finally) and has done decently, if not exceptionaly, but I have a confidence that sooner or later he will blossom into a true Test-class bowler, he has all the talent needed. Well, either that or he's a bowling Ramprakash.....

Bottom line, Collingwood wouldn't make up the runs with his batting (and fielding) that we'd lose by having only a four prong attack.

 

[Pedro Delgado]

Huh? Whats Giles not being able to bat got to do with him averaging 50 with the ball for bugger-all wickets.

So, if Colly doesnt play you select Anderson

Bell's average of 20 doesnt lie

Gilchrist hasnt scored any runs but at least he can catch

Giles has got vital wickets during the series, clearly it's an Ashes you've not watched too closely. Averages don't mean FA for the likes of Gilo, he'll never be a great, but he does a splendid job for England and Spain.

 

[social]

Giles has got vital wickets during the series, clearly it's an Ashes you've not watched too closely. Averages don't mean FA for the likes of Gilo, he'll never be a great, but he does a splendid job for England and Spain.

A test-class spinner would have bowled Eng to victory at Old Trafford.

He seems totally devoid of any strategy other than to hope the batsmen has a swing or that the ball misbehaves out of the rough.

Giles has chipped in with the odd useful wicket but with the exception of 1 or 2 spells, has been inaccurate and unpenetrative.

 

[social]

The world is slowly returning to normal.

Glenn McGrath is back to lead the Aus attack and Eng's footballers suffer another embarassing defeat

 

[social]

I think England should choos Anderson over Collingwood for as much psychological reasons as anything. Selecting Anderson shows the same attitude, picking a side of four quicks to really trouble the opposition and take the attack to them. Collingwood would be the 'saftey first' option, but a) that can backfire as seen plenty of times in the past, the extra bat does not automatically guarentee a good total, and b) it sends a negative message both to the Aussies that we aren't as confident as we should be having outplayed them 3 tests in a row and also to our own players that the selectors and coach don't think we can win without having a 'just in case' guy. Of course, the message would be inadvertent, but that is irrelevant. 2-1 up and playing the better cricket, we should be positive, look to win at the Oval and bury the series once and for all.

If the Aussies win the toss, bat and get off to a good start, say 240-3 at tea, I'd rather have an extra quick to help the attack than a guy who bowls dibby dobber medium pace (but don't worry, he can bat a bit too!). I think Anderson has a lot of talent, anyone who saw him down under in 2003 and at the World Cup couldn't deny that. However, as he has shown since then he is also very raw. He has had a solid year of county cricket (finally) and has done decently, if not exceptionaly, but I have a confidence that sooner or later he will blossom into a true Test-class bowler, he has all the talent needed. Well, either that or he's a bowling Ramprakash.....

Bottom line, Collingwood wouldn't make up the runs with his batting (and fielding) that we'd lose by having only a four prong attack.

Totally agree.

Anderson has been prematurely written off by too many people.

He's got some pace and bowls out-swing with a nice high action.

Selecting Colly is nothing more than a defensive measure which is totally contrary to the way Eng has played, and dominated, the last few tests.

 

[sqwerty]

All this conjecture about team selections and likely results is irrelevant.

It's going to rain for 5 days.

We're GOOOOONNNNE !

At least the next Ashes series is in Australia. The best thing about that is the Urn will be up for grabs in 16 months......not 2 and half years which is how long it'll be after the Australian series !

 

[sqwerty]

Totally agree.

Anderson has been prematurely written off by too many people.

He's got some pace and bowls out-swing with a nice high action.

Selecting Colly is nothing more than a defensive measure which is totally contrary to the way Eng has played, and dominated, the last few tests.

Yep....I've played in games a thousand times where we've picked the extra bat only to be rolled for 100 !

The thing is....If England play Collingwood, not only does it mean he or Giles is coming on in the first 20 overs but it upsets the whole mentality of the batting lineup.

Better to minimise the impact i reckon......
,.....but who cares.......it's going to rain for 5 days.......WE'RE GOOOOOOOONNNNNE !

 

[Pedro Delgado]

A test-class spinner would have bowled Eng to victory at Old Trafford.

He seems totally devoid of any strategy other than to hope the batsmen has a swing or that the ball misbehaves out of the rough.

Giles has chipped in with the odd useful wicket but with the exception of 1 or 2 spells, has been inaccurate and unpenetrative.

Possibly so, yet without his vital efforts Australia may have been in a much better position than they are now. He's been a cog in the wheel that sees us leading the Ashes 2-1 with one to play, and scored the runs that sees us sitting pretty.

So "ner".

 

[Pedro Delgado]

,.....but who cares.......it's going to rain for 5 days.......WE'RE GOOOOOOOONNNNNE !

Nonsense. There may be showers/bad light on Thursday aaaarvo and Friday moooorno, possibly some interuptions on Sat, but plenty of time for a result. Where'd you get your 5 day forcast from?

 

[sqwerty]

Nonsense. There may be showers/bad light on Thursday aaaarvo and Friday moooorno, possibly some interuptions on Sat, but plenty of time for a result. Where'd you get your 5 day forcast from?

from the bureau of pessimism

 

[sqwerty]

Possibly so, yet without his vital efforts Australia may have been in a much better position than they are now. He's been a cog in the wheel that sees us leading the Ashes 2-1 with one to play, and scored the runs that sees us sitting pretty.

So "ner".

Giles has looked dangerous for most of the series and has got some vital breakthroughs.

His strength is his accuracy and he rarely bowls a loose ball which complements whoever he is bowling in tandem with

 

[sqwerty]

Giles has looked dangerous for most of the series and has got some vital breakthroughs.

His strength is his accuracy and he rarely bowls a loose ball which complements whoever he is bowling in tandem with

Having said that though.....Martyn has made him look a lot better than he is with a couple of those 'balls of the century'......that turned 3 inches

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

While I wouldn't say that Giles "can't bowl", he's certainly massively overrated on this forum, particularly with regard to his performance in this series. He's been handy and blocks up an end to give the seamers a rest, which yes does his job for England, but he's not really good enough. If England had a decent spinner who could be relied on to actually take wickets when the pitch was turning, even if he couldn't do anything when it wasn't, it would make them a significantly better side.

As social said, he has exactly one tactic, which is to bowl over the wicket to defensive fields and try and get the batsman to do something stupid or get a freak delivery to do something out of the rough. There will come a time when England's seamers are struggling and they need a strike spinner who can do something else and take a five wicket haul.

Mind you, I think Giles has bowled better in the past to poorer batsmen, but the fact remains that in any wicket taking capacity he's been a resounding disappointment this series after the excellent summer he had last year.

 

[honestbharani]

for a captain, ponting certainly does have his way with words doesn't he?
"It would be unfair if it was my fault if we lost this Ashes series"
good to see how positive he is that even before the last test, hes defending his captaincy for losing the series.

I have always been saying that he was not the best choice for Aussie captaincy and that just proves it, basically. His team may still even win this match, but I don't see how he can termed as the best captain in Australia, leave alone the rest of the world.

 

[honestbharani]

Jones out is a big blow for England and for the first time in this series, they are the ones being hit by an injury going into the game. It remains to be seen how they cope with this. I think it is time for Harmison to come to the party. He has been doing basically nothing in this series save the first test and I think he might make the difference for England in this test. England will need to put up a big first innings score, whether they bat first or second. Australia will be going in with probably their best attack of the series, so England's batting will hold the key AFAIC. As far as batting goes, Australia will continue to struggle, IMHO. I don't see how they could have made plans to counter swing and reverse swing in just a matter of days. Gavaskar always says how it takes time to make adjustments to a batter's technique, even minor ones.

 

[sqwerty]

Jones out is a big blow for England and for the first time in this series, they are the ones being hit by an injury going into the game. It remains to be seen how they cope with this. I think it is time for Harmison to come to the party. He has been doing basically nothing in this series save the first test and I think he might make the difference for England in this test. England will need to put up a big first innings score, whether they bat first or second. Australia will be going in with probably their best attack of the series, so England's batting will hold the key AFAIC. As far as batting goes, Australia will continue to struggle, IMHO. I don't see how they could have made plans to counter swing and reverse swing in just a matter of days. Gavaskar always says how it takes time to make adjustments to a batter's technique, even minor ones.

I don't believe Australia will struggle with the bat. (I stand to be corrected). The Oval should suit them, Jones out makes a huge difference particularly since Collingwood is in.

Realistically Hoggard has only had one good test (the last one) when the ball swung for him. If it's not swinging he won't be much use with the old ball. That just leaves Harmison and Flintoff to do the majority of the work....and Harmison has looked the least dangerous of the lot of them. Sure he's hit a few blokes but he hasn't been able to sustain his line.

Warne and Lee have had no trouble with him. I'll back Australia to come good with the bat especially if they bat first.