*Official* Road to 2013 Ashes

[stephen]

What I think the best batting order for England would be:

Cowan
Rogers
Hughes
Watson (if bowling, otherwise Khawaja)
Clarke
Warner
Haddin
bowlers...

What I think the order will be:

Cowan
Warner
Rogers
Hughes
Clarke
Watson
Haddin
bowlers...

Warner made his name in first class cricket batting at #6. It's actually quite a good spot for an aggressive batsman to bat at. In England, with the ball swinging I think it's a lot safer to have our best two "proven" batsmen batting 5 and 6 than having one open. Rogers and Cowan could then take the shine off the ball and so when Clarke comes in at 3/60, at least it will be 3/60 (30) instead of 3/60 (12).

 

[Jono]

What I think the best batting order for England would be:

Cowan
Rogers
Hughes
Watson (if bowling, otherwise Khawaja)
Clarke
Warner
Haddin
bowlers...

Big call to drop Cook.



















Ah thank you.

 

[Furball]

I'd like to change my vote to fertang, if I may.

 

[stephen]

Big call to drop Cook.



















Ah thank you.

Perhaps I should have said "for playing in England".

 

[adub]

Warner made his name in first class cricket batting at #6.

He played 4 games at 6, did nothing and got dropped for a year.

It was only when he got promoted to open that he did anything with 99, 114, 47, 148 in his first 4 Shield games at opener along with 211, 48 and 82 opening for Aus A in Zimbabwe in the middle of that run. He was straight into the test side after the 148.

None of that is to say he couldn't make a decent 6, but the only name he made for himself at 6 for NSW was as a great white ball slogger who probably wasn't cut out for First Class cricket.

Personally I reckon opening is definitely his go. The hard ball, quick bowling and the field in is when he excels. Warner really struggles to get going against more defensive fields and slower bowling. It's not like he's been rubbish lately either. He had a pretty solid summer with a ton and 4 50s. He should have converted probably 2 of those 50s into big ones, but he did get us off to flying starts. Even in the Indian debacle he managed a couple of good 50s. I doubt he'd have scored them coming in at 6. He's averaged 37 since the start of SA series, which admittedly isn't too pretty until you look at the rest of the side (Cowan 35, Hughes 29, Watson 23). We have bigger problems than Warner. He should stay at opener.

 

[social]

Rogers in the runs again and Cowan not doing much again

No evidence yet this UK summer to suggest that the latter should retain his spot

 

[the big bambino]

There's an article in the paper which includes discussion on Eng providing turning wickets bcos of our record in India and the fact they outgun us in slow bowling; something I'm sure that has occured to fans. In the article Clarke responds by saying atmospheric conditions in Eng will suit fast bowlers irrespective of the state of the pitch. Well maybe. I don't know. But he didn't scorn the suggestion. Could we see a bunch of turners suddenly pop up in the test venures this summer? Either way it mightn't make much difference as our batsmen are suspectible to swing as well. Just that it makes calculating sense to exploit our weakness against spin while neutering our fast bowling talent even at the cost of inhibiting their own.

 

[Jono]

Yeah its interesting. I genuinely believe preparing turners would be a great tactic by England.

I also genuinely believe that there is no chance of England actually doing it.

 

[the big bambino]

Duuno about that. Might find an unfortunate outbreak of fusarium or they dust off the 1956 playbook.

 

[Adders]

Yeah its interesting. I genuinely believe preparing turners would be a great tactic by England.

I don't, not at all.

Sure we may have 2 better spinners than the Aussies, but our strength and our normal conditions suit swing bowling. To prepare turners may not suit the Aussies but I also think it goes against what suits us best too.

To even think about having to go away from the norm to face the poorest Australian side to tour our shores in forever would be weak as piss IMO.

It's funny, 1 series win in India and now people talk about Eng being spin gods I don't think we are.....not by a long shot. I'd still be very concerned about our batsmen having to bat on raging turners.

I also genuinely believe that there is no chance of England actually doing it.

I think if there was a need to seek such an advantage we'd do it, and so we should......but I don't think that's the case.

If we are tied going into the last test I wouldn't mind them turning up a result wicket (like 2009)

 

[Burgey]

Rogers in the runs again and Cowan not doing much again

No evidence yet this UK summer to suggest that the latter should retain his spot

Except for the fact he got 80 od in his last test, didn't he?

 

[NUFAN]

I think if there was a need to seek such an advantage we'd do it, and so we should......but I don't think that's the case.

If we are tied going into the last test I wouldn't mind them turning up a result wicket (like 2009)

If its tied going into the last Test you'd be mad not to produce an absolute road to bat on - if you wanted to dock the pitch to suit England.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Where are the tests?

Trent Bridge - Swings loads, rarely any spin.
Lords - Graveyard for spinners.
Old Trafford - Used to be a paradise for Monty and Harmison with bounce. Pitch turned round so we don't know.
Riverside - Unknown, never had a test during the summer before so we have no idea what pitch will be like.
Oval - Batting track that turns later on.

Realistically there are only two options for England to prepare pitches to suit Swann and Monty, Old Trafford and Oval.Might be a useful back up plan if things don't go well in the opening couple of tests.

 

[social]

Both teams will rely on their seam attack for the most part with Swann being called on to contain and Lyon relied upon to pick up a couple of wickets here and there

If either team is forced to rely heavily on spin, then they will be more than half way towards being ****ed IMO

 

[marc71178]

Except for the fact he got 80 od in his last test, didn't he?

And has also had to play under much harder conditions for batting so far.

 

[social]

Except for the fact he got 80 od in his last test, didn't he?

Nope, 38 & 24

Neither failures or enough

 

[hendrix]

I don't, not at all.

Sure we may have 2 better spinners than the Aussies, but our strength and our normal conditions suit swing bowling. To prepare turners may not suit the Aussies but I also think it goes against what suits us best too.

To even think about having to go away from the norm to face the poorest Australian side to tour our shores in forever would be weak as piss IMO.

I'm tempted to agree with this, but I'm not convinced that the England pacers are what they used to be, on current evidence. Sure Jimmy Anderson is still number 2 most consistent test bowler in the world, but there are some genuine question marks over the rest of the bowlers. Is Stuart Broad still an opening bowler or would he be more suited to first change? Will Tremlett be fit and firing? If not, Bresnan?

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Playing two spinners in cloudy conditions in England because Australia can't play spin is like leaving your gun at home because five months ago your opponent lost a duel with wiffle bats.

 

[Jono]

Not if the pitches are spinning though, and not if your third fast bowler is not fit or **** form. If the pitches were spinning, plus there was helpful conditions for swing, I really don't see how 2 fast bowlers and 2 spinners would be a bad tactic.

Really, if Tremlett isn't fit playing Monty on a turning track would not be a horrible choice ahead of Bresnan or Finn. I guess it depends on Bresnan's form and fitness, but as of right now, it wouldn't be a ridiculous call.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

Not if the pitches are spinning though, and not if your third fast bowler is not fit or **** form. If the pitches were spinning, plus there was helpful conditions for swing, I really don't see how 2 fast bowlers and 2 spinners would be a bad tactic.

Really, if Tremlett isn't fit playing Monty on a turning track would not be a horrible choice ahead of Bresnan or Finn. I guess it depends on Bresnan's form and fitness, but as of right now, it wouldn't be a ridiculous call.

Depends if we get an Oval 2009 deck again. It wouldn't matter either way because Lyon will be a lock-in for that Test anyway (and probably every Test if he bowls to his average) as opposed to us being blindsided when playing four quicks last time.

Moreover, they only needed Swann and a magic Broad spell to dismiss a (much better) batting lineup. Reckon Monty will be kept as understudy this series.