The Road to the 2009 Ashes

[Richard]

Poorest of the all the quicks? surely you were watching a different ENG vs IND series. After Lord's all the England bowlers on two flat decks in TB & the Oval struggled with only Anderson looking threatening. The Indian pace trio totally outbowled them.

Only Anderson looked threatening? At Trent Bridge especially, Sidebottom rarely stopped looking so, and Tremlett grabbed a few consolation wickets via some decent bowling in the second-innings too.

I've rarely (if ever) seen someone bowl as well for as little reward as Sidebottom at Trent Bridge and to a lesser extent The Oval. Could easily have had 9 or 10 wickets in the former game, everything he beat the batsman with just seemed to miss the edge rather than hit it.

And of course he was handicapped at The Oval by Prior's abysmal catching.

 

[Pratters]

English squad thoughts:

Cook
Denly
Vaughan
KP
Collingwood
Bell
Ambrose
Anderson
Sidebottom
Tremlett/Harmison
Panesar

Denley ahead of Carberry where I am concerned. Have liked the look of Denley whenever I have watched him and given that it is 18 months still to go, there is a fair chance that Denley might play if he piles the runs. It is a long shot neverthless.

Bowling wise, some one mentioned that he fears that Hoggard might not be able to last that well for 18 months from now and that is fair enough I think. He would be 32 and a half and despite his ability to swing the ball, he is more likely not to make the XI than to make it imo. Will he be able to put away the injury concerns and be match fit? It makes me put a question mark over him.

I disagree regarding Anderson and liked what I saw during the India - England test series. If he can go from strength to strength, I can see him as a crucial member of the squad.

The dark horse for the XI would be Simon Jones. If he can make a solid come back, he would have a bit of a chance of making the XI.

About Flintoff, I would say that there is more chance that he will not play than he will play at this point like wpdavid said earlier in the thread.

I am not sure who would keep in the Ashes but the back to back series v New Zealand should make things clearer regarding this aspect.


Australian squad thoughts:

Hayden
Jaques
Ponting
Hussey
Clarke
Watson
Haddin
Lee
Johnson
Clark
MacGill/McGain/any other spinner

Watson would be a huge asset for the squad given his clean hitting, the smaller grounds in England and the balance he adds to the squad.

England are not great players of spin traditionally and though they have become better at it, they are not the best still and I would imagine that Australia would like to go in with a specialist spinner. I fancy MacGill here. He has 39 wickets @ 24 against them, the best among major test nations in terms of wickets and average. He has shown an almost desperate hunger to play more and even though he has declined a tad in recent times, this could be his last hurrah. A spinner also plays the role of the stock bowler when need be and I certainly expect Australia to go in with one spinner... if not MacGIll, then some one else.

Johnson is developing well and improving in aspects of his cricket. He can be a real threat in the series and I will be very surprised if he doesn't play.

The dark horse for the XI would be Shaun Tait. Like Jones for England, If he can make a good come back, he would have a bit of a chance of making the XI.

Of course, these are only what I think might be the squads. Don't kill me if Denly proves a complete failure between now and then and Hoggard and Flintoff have superb Ashes series as there is every chance that might happen as well. 18 months is a long way away and a lot can happen between now and then. It should be superb series to watch whatever happens.

 

[Pup Clarke]

Anderson at 8 is ITSTL.

 

[Pratters]

Anderson at 8 is ITSTL.

Meh, bowlers not according to batting order.

 

[Richard]

English squad thoughts:

Cook
Denley
Vaughan
KP
Collingwood
Bell
Ambrose
Anderson
Sidebottom
Tremlett/Harmison
Panesar

Denley ahead of Carberry where I am concerned. Have liked the look of Denley whenever I have watched him and given that it is 18 months still to go, there is a fair chance that Denley might play if he piles the runs. It is a long shot neverthless.

Bowling wise, some one mentioned that he fears that Hoggard might not be able to last that well for 18 months from now and that is fair enough I think. He would be 32 and a half and despite his ability to swing the ball, he is more likely not to make the XI than to make it imo.

I disagree regarding Anderson and liked what I saw during the India - England test series. If he can go from strength to strength, I can see him as a crucial member of the squad.

The dark horse for the XI would be Simon Jones. If he can make a come back, he would have a bit of a chance of making the XI.

Aboout Flintoff, I would say that there is more chance that he will not play than he will play at this point like wpdavid said earlier in the thread.

I am not sure who would keep in the Ashes but the back to back series v New Zealand should make things clearer regarding this aspect.

As long as whoever it is keeps better than Prior in Third Tests and Geraint Jones early in his career.

Joseph Denly is an interesting one. As I've said numerous times, I didn't follow last season (which was essentially his first - he'd played just 1 or 2 Championship games before then) with my normal attention-to-detail, but I seem to recall he started well and fell away. I've so far had precisely zero chance to assess him technically, either. However, purely and simply if he were to go well again next season - ideally all the way through, rather than starting well then falling away - he'd undoubtedly be in with a decent shot. Right now, though, I still think his captain (Key) deserves to be in with a shot more than he does. And I still harbour hopes that Key might have a decent Test career, if not a terribly long one. Denly, if he has the goods, can wait another couple of years if neccessary. He has plenty of time on his hands.

 

[Jamee999]

Cook
Vaughan
Bell
Pietersen
Collingwood
Shah
Ambrose+
Broad
Sidebottom
Hoggard
Panesar

vs

Hayden
Jaques
Ponting
Hussey
Clarke
Symonds
Ronchi+
Lee
Bracken
Clark
Johnson

 

[Richard]

A fantasy between you and Nath (with doubtless very different outcomes) that Bracken plays?

Also, Ronchi, ITSTL - that a "I hope from an English perspective"? 'Cos I can't see any immediate chance of Ronchi being a better wicketkeeper or batsman than Haddin.

 

[Burgey]

Steve Waugh's thoughts on England atm:

http://cricket.com.au/default.aspx?s=newsdisplay&id=40967

 

[Richard]

Stating the obvious really is annoying sometimes...

England has 'gone backwards a long way' since the 2005 Ashes series, claims former Australia batsman Steve Waugh.

Well, you don't say...

What I see now, they had a great 2005 Ashes series but all of a sudden they didn't play so hard.

They thought they'd done their job, but they took their foot off the accelerator.

Being the best side in the world you have to be consistent over a long period of time - not just one series - and they really let themselves down in Australia with their planning and their preparation, and they haven't recovered since.

They have gone backwards a long way since 2005. They rested on their laurels, it's pretty obvious. You can't win one series and then lose the next 5-0.

Never fails to irritate the hell out of me either. If teams lose 5 or 6 players to injury, they WILL have their feet forced from the accellerator.

The New Zealand issue he mentions is I feel a little overblown, as discussed in a recent thread.

 

[Burgey]

But when they were out here last year, hadn't they just lost Vaughan and S Jones from the side which beat Australia in 05? God, it's only last year, and I've forgotten already!!
Edit: of course, Tresco once they arrived as well.

 

[Richard]

At various points over the last 2 years we've been without: Simon Jones, Vaughan, Giles, Trescothick, Flintoff and Hoggard. At other times the aforementioned have played despite not being fit to perform. That's before we even go into the fact that in Geraint Jones and Harmison we had 2 players in the 2005 team who weren't very good ITFP.

That is one hell of a lot of loss.

 

[tooextracool]

Yes, but he has improved his game to bowl on surfaces that many expected him to be ineffective on..

Yes but he is a swing bowler first and everything else thereafter. There is no doubt that his print value reduces when the ball doesnt swing.

Poorest of the all the quicks? surely you were watching a different ENG vs IND series. After Lord's all the England bowlers on two flat decks in TB & the Oval struggled with only Anderson looking threatening. The Indian pace trio totally outbowled them.

Anderson looked threatening?! Thats news to me. Anderson bowled poorer than Tremlett and Sidebottom, significantly poorer. Infact he was absolutely massacred in the first innings of both the Oval and TB, and was far more expensive than his peers. And while TB did flatten out after the first innings, there was enough in the wicket for the bowlers to exploit. Zaheer, Tremlett and even Sidebottom showed it.

As i took my time to explain to darick Anderson career has had its many problems etc since his 2003 explosion which has hindered his progress as a bowler. Currently this period (2006 Ashes to now) is the first time since 2003 that he is getting a injury free run in the side & he has shown he still has what i takes to cut it at this level, just unfortunately the mistakes that he could have worked out in CC or by playing consistent international cricket over the years he has to work out now.

Well this is the first time he has merited such a run in any case since his first run in 2003. He has had an extended run in the side and shown nothing. There is no better place to improve than in CC, it simply deflates any bowler's confidence to get hammered everytime he takes the field in tests.

 

[tooextracool]

Denley ahead of Carberry where I am concerned. Have liked the look of Denley whenever I have watched him and given that it is 18 months still to go, there is a fair chance that Denley might play if he piles the runs. It is a long shot neverthless.

I have only seen denly bat once, against the India XI in one of the warm ups and noticed that his footwork was all over the shop. Whilst i dont want to shoot down his career prospects before they start i would think that he needs to score runs for the England Lions side first before he can merit selection, right now though i dont think he is ready.

Bowling wise, some one mentioned that he fears that Hoggard might not be able to last that well for 18 months from now and that is fair enough I think. He would be 32 and a half and despite his ability to swing the ball, he is more likely not to make the XI than to make it imo. Will he be able to put away the injury concerns and be match fit? It makes me put a question mark over him.

The dark horse for the XI would be Shaun Tait. Like Jones for England, If he can make a good come back, he would have a bit of a chance of making the XI.

Dark horse for mine will be Ben Hilfenhaus. Tait is, always has been, and always will be rubbish, that i do not doubt. I think with his action it is highly unlikely:
a) hed be able to maintain a long term career
b) be able to bowl line and length for a consistent period of time

Everyone has their opinion of course, but this is mine. Tait has been unable to sustain a consistent domestic career. How on earth can he be expected to bowl well consistently at the test match level?

 

[tooextracool]

At various points over the last 2 years we've been without: Simon Jones, Vaughan, Giles, Trescothick, Flintoff and Hoggard. At other times the aforementioned have played despite not being fit to perform. That's before we even go into the fact that in Geraint Jones and Harmison we had 2 players in the 2005 team who weren't very good ITFP.

That is one hell of a lot of loss.

Ive said it before and I'll say it again. Despite all the fantasies that go around regarding English injuries, captaincies and selections, there are only 2 things that really made a difference to English performance since 2004/05. The loss of Simon Jones, and the loss/injuries sustained by Andrew Flintoff that effectively ruined his career. Everything else is just fallacy. Vaughan averaging 30-40 odd is not going to change the course of any series, certainly not while Paul Collingwood or whoever else that replaced him was performing just as well.

 

[FBU]

Something is going to have to be done about the England bowling. I can't see Flintoff being fit and England will end up playing 4 bowlers. Panesar's averages in the last two series in the 50s.

In the last 12 Tests

Harmison - 32 wickets at 43.03
Hoggard - 35 wickets at 36.54
Sidebottom - 29 wickets at 34.48 (10 Tests)

Australia
Lee - 61 wickets at 25.54
Clark - 48 wickets at 24.39
Johnson - 24 wickets at 32.12 (6 Tests)

 

[Pratters]

I have only seen denly bat once, against the India XI in one of the warm ups and noticed that his footwork was all over the shop. Whilst i dont want to shoot down his career prospects before they start i would think that he needs to score runs for the England Lions side first before he can merit selection, right now though i dont think he is ready.

Whatever I have seen of him has been from England and his footwork looked all right in England to me. Haven't been able to watch the Duleep Trophy games he played in though I do know that he didn't fair well in them. This was his first time in India though and I don't think his selection would depend on how he performs in this tour. It comes down to how he performs domestically this season and how the other openers in the team have done till then for him to have a chance imo.

 

[Pratters]

Dark horse for mine will be Ben Hilfenhaus. Tait is, always has been, and always will be rubbish, that i do not doubt. I think with his action it is highly unlikely:
a) hed be able to maintain a long term career
b) be able to bowl line and length for a consistent period of time

Everyone has their opinion of course, but this is mine. Tait has been unable to sustain a consistent domestic career. How on earth can he be expected to bowl well consistently at the test match level?

I am talking about who might make the squad, not who is good or bad. Tait has played 3 tests for Australia, despite not being able to 'sustain a consistent domestic career', in your words. If he makes a good come back (and that is a big if, which is why I have him as an under dog and nothing more), he has a fair chance of making the Ashes squad imo.

 

[Richard]

Ive said it before and I'll say it again. Despite all the fantasies that go around regarding English injuries, captaincies and selections, there are only 2 things that really made a difference to English performance since 2004/05. The loss of Simon Jones, and the loss/injuries sustained by Andrew Flintoff that effectively ruined his career. Everything else is just fallacy. Vaughan averaging 30-40 odd is not going to change the course of any series, certainly not while Paul Collingwood or whoever else that replaced him was performing just as well.

Vaughan's injury might not have taken much in the way of batting from the team of 2004 and 2005, but one thing it certainly did was caused the headless-chicken effect regarding captaincy. There's no doubt in my mind the never-ending merry-go-round between first Trescothick, then Flintoff and Strauss, has disrupted things. Has it affected the performances of any player? I don't really think so (apart maybe from Trescothick). But it's been a massive issue and I don't doubt that had Vaughan been fit throughout 2005\06, 2006 and 2006\07 things would not have been quite so bad. Also, of course, Vaughan's form when he returned was superb, and maybe just maybe he might have hit that form earlier had he been fit.

Also, Giles' lower-order batting may not have made much difference, but then again, it just might have.

And of course, Flintoff's injuries have deprived England of a bowler with the potential to turn matches on their head, one who was pretty much at the peak of his powers when the injury struck again. Such a loss will always be massively felt.

And are you really telling me you don't think Hoggard might just have made a difference had he played against India last summer instead of Anderson?

 

[aussie]

Yes but he is a swing bowler first and everything else thereafter. There is no doubt that his print value reduces when the ball doesnt swing

But not as much as many would have tought before he produced those analysis in Mumbai & Adelaide in 06..

Anderson looked threatening?! Thats news to me. Anderson bowled poorer than Tremlett and Sidebottom, significantly poorer. Infact he was absolutely massacred in the first innings of both the Oval and TB, and was far more expensive than his peers. And while TB did flatten out after the first innings, there was enough in the wicket for the bowlers to exploit. Zaheer, Tremlett and even Sidebottom showed it.

Ahh this is how i am catching you & Richard. You didn't look at those innings yall scorecard watching. Although he was expensive & yea he bowled his share of bad balls but he was the most threatening English bowler in that series. Sidebottom was unlucky at times with Prior missing catches off him (can't remember if it was TB or the Oval), but Anderson easily looked more likely to get batsmen out in that series than any other English bowler.

Well this is the first time he has merited such a run in any case since his first run in 2003.

Don't like your tone here TBH, you make it sound as if he was a total novice after SA 03, Anderson would have certainly merited a run in the 2006 home summer if he wasn't injured after the IND series.

He has had an extended run in the side and shown nothing.

So since the Ashes (in tests) you have seen nothing in Anderson's bowling that you would consider a positive sign for the future?. Unbelievable..

 

[aussie]

Dark horse for mine will be Ben Hilfenhaus. Tait is, always has been, and always will be rubbish, that i do not doubt. I think with his action it is highly unlikely:
a) hed be able to maintain a long term career
b) be able to bowl line and length for a consistent period of time

Got to disagree with your assesment on Tait although i agree that given his action it may cut short his career or maybe how long he maintains his credentials as a tearaway.

Calling him rubbish firstly i way over the top & i don't see why he won't be able to maintain a decent line & lenght despite his action once he plays consistent cricket without being injured. When he broke the Australia domestic record in 2004/05 before i never got the idea he was a wild tearaway & even as i've seen him on the international stage i view him as bowler who just needs to keep bowling to maintain control given his complicated action given that he is fast enough to beat the best of batsmen for sheer pace.

Everyone has their opinion of course, but this is mine. Tait has been unable to sustain a consistent domestic career. How on earth can he be expected to bowl well consistently at the test match level?

What gives you this idea. Don't know the exact domestic figures but he started his domestic career in 2002/03 then in 2003/04 he broke the Australian domestic record before the Ashes tour, 05/06 he was injured for the 1st half of the season but came back with some solid bowling performances to force away into the test side for the SA tour in 06, i think he had another injured plagued start to the 06/07 season but was never going to break up the Lee/McGrath/Clark combo unless injuries occured & well we know what has occured this season.

Tait is never going to be a metronome but he has the ability to do an Akhtar a la 2002 vs Australia, which makes him a special bowler in no way..