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

[BoyBrumby]

It's a strong signal from the selectors that they have faith in the side that reached the dizzy heights of No 2 in the world - something that was achieved in part through consistency of selection. A single defeat doesn't make England a bad side (yet ).

Yeah, I totally agree. It just makes Tremlett's inclusion seem a bit of a token gesture. Injuries aside, I can't see him getting a game.

 

[kendall]

I would be suprised if all the bowlers are fit for all the tests and even if they are i think it is very likely that Tremlett wil get a game before the end of the year

 

[SquidAU]

England selectors have done the right thing by sticking with the current squad.....no need to press the big red button yet.

 

[Hoggy31]

England selectors have done the right thing by sticking with the current squad.....no need to press the big red button yet.

Haha, Top post Squidster

 

[Pedro Delgado]

You two are clearly in love. Quite sweet actually.

 

[Top_Cat]

It's a strong signal from the selectors that they have faith in the side that reached the dizzy heights of No 2 in the world - something that was achieved in part through consistency of selection. A single defeat doesn't make England a bad side (yet ).

Neither will losing this series, if it goes that way. Good call by the selectors to show faith in their players. Great to see.

 

[luckyeddie]

Haha, Top post Squidster

..and the song that she sang was "Oh, she's easy to please."
I felt her heart quiver and I knew what I'd done.
I said "Have you had enough of my old sporting gun?"

(extract from a very, very rude song indeed from Fairport Convention)

 

[BoyBrumby]

..and the song that she sang was "Oh, she's easy to please."
I felt her heart quiver and I knew what I'd done.
I said "Have you had enough of my old sporting gun?"

(extract from a very, very rude song indeed from Fairport Convention)

Luckyeddie in secret folkie shame!!!

 

[Nate]

Something personal against Dizzy?

Haha, nah, just reckon Kasper should get the spot ahead of him.

 

[Nate]

I reckon Price should be rather successful.

 

[Dizzy #4]

What the hell is going on, cricinfo's one is stuffed

first it had 3 batsman at the crease, then It said Ponting still yet to bat, but has a score, what is going on?

 

[superkingdave]

At least Vaughan got some runs this weekend, even if it was in a OD match. 116*(129) out of 216-6 with the next highest score 28..

 

[BoyBrumby]

At least Vaughan got some runs this weekend, even if it was in a OD match. 116*(129) out of 216-6 with the next highest score 28..

Encouraging. If we're to make a decent fist of the 2nd we need the skipper in prime form. KP aside, I still think he's our man most likely to.

 

[nick-o]

I'm slightly surprised. I thought Colly would've been added to make a 13.

I really don't think there's much point including Tremlett either, I can't see him replacing any of the other seamers on the basis of one test. Hoggy probably had the weakest game, but if Tremlett has been included just to keep him on his toes why not Colly for Bell and/or Gilo?

I disagree on both counts.

Adding Coll-o to the squad could only damage Gilo's confidence; adding him would seem to Gilo, and to all the commentators and media, that there was a question mark against Gilo's name. Gilo's problems are mainly mental -- remember how he was saying a year or so ago that he was thinking of retiring from international cricket, didn't think he had the goods... With soemone like that, you have to build him up, not knock him down. Putting Coll-o in the squad, even if he wasn't used, would have a huge negative effect on Gilo, even if he was used.

As for the quickies, remember that Flint-o was getting surgery just a few months ago. Jon-oS was out injured nearly two years. Harm-o, to me, still doesn't look fit for a full five-match series.

Having a back-up in the squad makes immense sense, in case someone breaks down. The selectors are saying that Trem-o is next in line, and deserves to be there as such -- it's a huge validation from the selectors that he's important to them, and keeping him in the squad will give him the confidence he would need if someone does break down and a replacement is needed.

It's been years and years since one could say it, but the selectors have got it totally right this time. Well done!!!

 

[BoyBrumby]

I disagree on both counts.

Adding Coll-o to the squad could only damage Gilo's confidence; adding him would seem to Gilo, and to all the commentators and media, that there was a question mark against Gilo's name. Gilo's problems are mainly mental -- remember how he was saying a year or so ago that he was thinking of retiring from international cricket, didn't think he had the goods... With soemone like that, you have to build him up, not knock him down. Putting Coll-o in the squad, even if he wasn't used, would have a huge negative effect on Gilo, even if he was used.

As for the quickies, remember that Flint-o was getting surgery just a few months ago. Jon-oS was out injured nearly two years. Harm-o, to me, still doesn't look fit for a full five-match series.

Having a back-up in the squad makes immense sense, in case someone breaks down. The selectors are saying that Trem-o is next in line, and deserves to be there as such -- it's a huge validation from the selectors that he's important to them, and keeping him in the squad will give him the confidence he would need if someone does break down and a replacement is needed.

It's been years and years since one could say it, but the selectors have got it totally right this time. Well done!!!

Well the obvious answer is that if a seamer broke down Tremlett could easily be summoned from darkest Hampshire and I'm sure Collingwood would be similarly called to the breech if (God forbid) one of the batters picks up a knock.

I'd say at least two of the seamers are every bit as given to self-doubt as Giles, so the case can be made that Tremlett's presence is equally likely to have the same adverse psychological affect on them as Colly's may on Gilo. Why support one first reserve’s presence in the squad & not the other? If the selectors really wanted to make a statement of intent they could have named the 11 there & then.

 

[King_Ponting]

haddin looking good for a centruy

 

[King_Ponting]

English selectors to give haddin english citizenship in 5.......4........3.........2..........1

 

[King_Ponting]

Damn dismissed on 94

 

[nick-o]

Well the obvious answer is that if a seamer broke down Tremlett could easily be summoned from darkest Hampshire and I'm sure Collingwood would be similarly called to the breech if (God forbid) one of the batters picks up a knock.

I'd say at least two of the seamers are every bit as given to self-doubt as Giles, so the case can be made that Tremlett's presence is equally likely to have the same adverse psychological affect on them as Colly's may on Gilo. Why support one first reserve’s presence in the squad & not the other? If the selectors really wanted to make a statement of intent they could have named the 11 there & then.

Well, for one, effectively the selectors have indeed 'named the 11 there & then' -- unless someone is injured, the starting 11 will undoubtedly be unchanged. This is a powerful psychological boost to all of the 11.

For two, Coll-o vs Gilo is an argument raging in the media, and neither Gilo nor the selctors are immune from it. Your argument is that Coll-o would be a reserve for one of the batters; but the perception around the country and the media is that it's Coll-o as a possible replacement for Gilo.

There's a huge difference between saying to a spinner : 'look, we're not sure you're good enough, so we're giving ourselves the option of playing an extra batsman instead'. and saying to a quickie : 'look, you're injury-prone, so we're giving ourselves a possible cover.'

It's a different argument altogether.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Well, for one, effectively the selectors have indeed 'named the 11 there & then' -- unless someone is injured, the starting 11 will undoubtedly be unchanged. This is a powerful psychological boost to all of the 11.

For two, Coll-o vs Gilo is an argument raging in the media, and neither Gilo nor the selctors are immune from it. Your argument is that Coll-o would be a reserve for one of the batters; but the perception around the country and the media is that it's Coll-o as a possible replacement for Gilo.

There's a huge difference between saying to a spinner : 'look, we're not sure you're good enough, so we're giving ourselves the option of playing an extra batsman instead'. and saying to a quickie : 'look, you're injury-prone, so we're giving ourselves a possible cover.'

It's a different argument altogether.

Surely tho if Tremlett has been named purely as cover (& I don't doubt that we'll have the same starting 11 barring injury) there is definite psychological mileage to be gained in actually naming the team?

It's true that the main debate in the media has been around dropping Giles for an extra batter, but there has also been a little debate around Hoggy's place. Mike Selvey in The Guardian compared his retention to that of Derek Underwood by Mike Brearley. Underwood was retained in case of rain; Selvey argued Hoggard is retained in case the pitch swings. Now Tremlett's presence may be solely precautionary, my contention remains that if that is the case why bother naming a 12 at all?

Hoggard, who strikes me as a deep thinking cricketer with his love of long solitary walks on the North Yorks moors with his dogs, inadvertantly gave the Aussies further motivation with his comments about McGrath & the age of their team. I'd suggest he's every bit as in need of a psychological boost as Giles.