- This topic has 116 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Well what happens to the Oval and Lord’s is not important. I think an 80,000 seat stadium in London would be a great idea. Greater capacity, lower ticket prices, bigger crowds, better atmosphere. The ground is the right shape and already paid for. Why should English fans have to crowd into poky little private-members museums like Lord’s and pay £100 for the privilege? I won’t be going to Edgbaston this year. £75 for the privilege of sitting side on at ground level is not my idea of value for money.
I’m not so sure about Australia. I have no doubt they will lose in South Africa but they will use the time well to bring on Siddle and one other. I’d drop both Katich and Hayden and take Phil Hughes and Shaun Marsh to South Africa, with Rogers as back-up. Katich and Hayden have been found out in England before.
Think they should have persevered with Krejza as Hauritz isn’t the answer. But there are two questions to be asked:
1. Will they be ruthless and clear-sighted enough to go for tough, hungry players and leave the jaded and the injured at home?
2. How good do they need to be to beat us anyway?Australia’s bowling demise has been evident since before they toured the West Indies but a fit Lee and Clarke in English conditions would still be a challenge, even though they’re 32 and 33. Will they both be fit though and can they both stand the workload required in a 4 man attack without Warne? I doubt it.
All ifs and buts, yet the attack we are seeing over next 3 days vs SA looks woeful. Admittedly i’ve only been watching the highlights but they hardly look likely to take the 17 wickets they need.
if they’re unable to win a test where the opposition are a) a batsman down, b) batting last on what looks will be a crack filled pitch, and c) playing in an inconsequential match as far as the result of the series is concerned, then it doesn’t bode well for the future.As a footnote, has anyone else noticed the similarity between the Aussies newest debutant, Bollinger, and the ugly "hey you guys…." freak from The Goonies! Maybe its a new tactic to scare the opposition out.
Bollinger’s picture on Cricinfo shows him shaven-headed. Perhaps he might like to consider that look again.
Well what happens to the Oval and Lord’s is not important. I think an 80,000 seat stadium in London would be a great idea.
To you maybe!
The prices are bad but not every test will sell out like the ashes…especillay in an athletics arena…..and half empty melbourne type places do not appeal.
as for katcih..he wont be dropped surely!
They might struggle to sell out for Bangladesh. But then we could use the little minor county grounds (Lord’s, The Oval).
Agreed, they won’t drop Katich
Stuart Clark extracting the reverse swing that eluded our entire squad in 2005 might be the difference between him earning the Man Of The Series gong and just your run-of-the-mill bowler.
If England make sure not to dilapidate prior to the First Test, they’ll win. Pretty simple.
There are two requirements for England to win back the Ashes
1. A poorer Australian team. This is certainly going to be the case though how poor is unclear and it seems to me that too many people are exaggerating their decline.
2. A united and effective England team. At the current time, we have an inexperienced captain in an ongoing dispute with the coach who has also let slip that he doesn’t think two of his batsmen (Bell and Shah) should be in the squad and is so weak that he wants to recall the former captain to the team (regardless of form) to help out with the tactical side of things. We have a number of batsmen (the aforementioned Bell, Collingwood and Cook) who have been out of form for a long time and a number six who is no longer worthy of batting at that position. We have no promising reserves for any of the batting positions. We have a spinner who lacks the ability to vary his pace, flight and even to set his own fields. We have an inconsistent swing bowler (Anderson) an inexperienced bowler (Broad) and an erratic one (Harmison). Of our two best bowlers, Flintoff is undoubtedly world class and Sidebottom is reliable, but both have been hampered by injuries. As with the batting, there are no outstanding replacements.
Now many of these issues may be resolved by the summer, but if people are talking about comparing the Australian and England teams as they stand at the moment, I really don’t see where all this English Ashes optimism is coming from.
Stuart Clark extracting the reverse swing that eluded our entire squad in 2005
Thats not his style or game is it? Far more of a Glenn McGrath clone that the new Simon Jones
Andrew
I dont think anyone is exaggerating their decline at all.We have a spinner who lacks the ability to vary his pace, flight and even to set his own fields
and who is vastly superior to the aussie spinners…. We also have Swann revitalised and the exceptionally talented Rashid progressing
Harmison has attitude problems away from home but no one can be in any doubt that in full flow he is the most dangerous bolwer on either side. Braod cannot simply be dismissed as "inexperienced". Whats the aussie bolwing line up then? Broad is a fine talent and will surely progress
Flintoff isnt injured at the presnt time and seems as fit as ever. Not something you can say about the rapidly fading lee or Stuart Clark
The main positive i see for the Aussies is that their current bowling line up will have a good run up to gain experience against a very good side before the ashes. Both Mitchell and Siddle are probably bankers come the summer.
I agree with Clives point about the relative merits of the spinners.
But will they gain confidence against a line up of batsmen who tends towards stickability rather than risk taking? It can work both ways…at the least
If they get beaten heavily in SA ( i believe they will be), we could also see some panic amongst the selectors
Clivex, as ever I admire your tireless spin.
I watched Siddle and Bollinger today. Looked pretty good to me. Mitchell Johnson has taken his wickets at something like 25 this series and has bowled with accuracy, hostility and is swinging the balls both ways. I agree with your assessment of Clark, he’s a line and length merchant, but he’s a good one and no reason why he would suddenly go to pieces in England. Even if we assume Lee is finished (a reasonable 50/50 chance I would say) the Aussie attack is pretty good.
Siddle is quick and accurate (two runs an over, generally) and he takes wickets and Bollinger reminded me of a left-arm Angus Fraser, though he could probably trim his run up a little. But Bollinger is likely to be second back-up with Siddle as first. A tough tour to South Africa against batsmen who sell their wickets dearly sounds like a pretty good warm-up to me.
Aussie domestic cricket is generally a pretty good testing ground for international cricket. English promotees from the county game by comparison tend to be a bit more hit and miss. Indeed, Fletcher had most success by plucking them out of county cricket before they learned too many bad habits. I don’t think it will take Siddle and co too long to settle in. And I reiterate – a line up including Strauss, Cook, Bell, Collingwood and Flintoff at six is nothing to fear.
Now for the spin department. My criticism of Monty is perhaps a little contrary. He is (by a small margin) the best spinner on either side (at the moment) but he is not progressing. His lack of variety and his inability (or unwillingness) to vary his flight means that once a batsman has gauged how far he is turning it, he ceases to be a threat. Now it is true the Aussies have been through a fair number of spinnesr in the last two years. We’ve seen MacGill, Hogg, Casson, McBain, White, Krejza and now Hauritz. Of that lot, Casson is probably worth another shot but Krejza looked really promising. He flights it nicely, turns it as much as any offie around bar Murali and doesn’t mind conceding runs. In another six months, he can improve past Monty. I like Swann but Krejza is better. Rashid is indeed a great prospect but I can’t see him getting a game this side of the Ashes.
An Aussie line-up of:
Katich
Marsh
Ponting
Hussey
Clarke
Symonds
Haddin
Johnson
Siddle
Clark
Krejzais more than capable of holding onto the Ashes and I believe they will.
As for the England bowlers, Harmison is as likely to be erratic as dangerous and I can’t see why Ponting, Hussey, Clarke and Symonds should be worried about Broad, good prospect or not. And the same goes for Anderson. He hasn’t troubled them before, why should he start causing them problems now? The reason I mention Sidebottom’s injury is that I’d like to see how he bowls post-injury before assuming that he’d be back to his best.
England’s line-up will probably be something like:
Cook
Strauss
Bell
KP
Collingwood
Flintoff
Prior
Broad
Anderson
Harmison
Panesar.Overall, I’d say we may have the edge in the bowling department, but it’s a small edge and both Siddle and Krejza have real potential. The Aussies are the stronger batting line-up by some distance and I can’t see that changing between now and the summer. As it stands, can’t see England winning back the Ashes.
watched Siddle and Bollinger today. Looked pretty good to me.
Its a decent pitch for bowlers now. Neither is express pace or has anything much that takes the eye
Monty is way ahead of Krezja who has been one of the most expensive new arrivals that ive seen
and I can’t see why Ponting, Hussey, Clarke and Symonds should be worried about Broad
given the long trough of form three of those are in, they should be worried about KP’s offspin and Bells medium pacers
Siddle is accurate and quick (90+mph). He bowled a couple of good spells at the MCG, did McKenzie and De Villiers for pace there, took five wickets today and seems pretty promising to me. And yes Krejza had a stinker at Perth, but he bowled well in India and his economy rate of 4 an over isn’t the end of the world for an attacking spinner. Though the Aussie selectors seem to think he is surplus to requirements so it is probably academic.
I’m intrigued by Bell’s medium pace – I’ve never actually seen it – is it Gooch style medium pace or more like Kallis? In my little book it says he’s taken a Test wicket too! I’ll try and find out who. If its Ponting, you may be onto something!
And I know everyone hates a pedant so I won’t point out that in this series, Clarke averages 86, Ponting 46 and an injured Symonds 30. I’ll give you Hussey though.
November 2005. 2nd Test Faisalabad:
Mohammed Yousuf……….c&b Bell……….78
I never knew he had it in him.
That one dismissal is worth a 5WI.
Since Warne’s departure I don’t know about Cricket Australia’s stance on spinners. In all reality Krejza or Hauritz give little more than rolling their arm over and tempting big shots, and Clarke and Symonds can be relied upon to do that if necessary.
A spinner like the Proteas’ Paul Harris would do nicely. The flight and drift he achieved at the MCG was brilliant. I didn’t care for turn as much – he was accurate and consistent.
That’s an accurate description of Hauritz but a little unfair on Krejza. He caused the Indians real problems in their own backyard, which was more than Monty was able to do.
The success of Harris is puzzling because he looked innocuous this summer.
Agreed that spin is only part of it – flight, drift, dip, variations in pace and length all work together. There is a wonderful passage in one of Cardus’s books about Wilfred Rhodes I might try to dig out.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.