Ashes 2015 - Australia tour of England July/September 2015

[blockerdave]

Personally, I'd rest Jimmy for the Pakistan/UAE. Flogging Jimmy on a dead pitch when he's just had a side injury and we've South Africa to come is not really advisable in my book.

Shocking I know, but I'd drop Bell and get a number 3 bedded in. Bell can't play spin and SA would be all over him: he needs to go. Provided Lyth doesn't get out in the same fashion in the 5th test, I'd give him that less pressurised series in the UAE to try and nail the spot down: we've been through altogether far too many openers and we need to try and back one. I want to keep Root at 4, and would try Hales at 3 in UAE where you'd hope he can play freely without too much movement.

I think Bairstow and Stokes should be in, Ali and Rashid for spin - maybe take Dawson in the squad for experience and backup. so this is giving us a team of 8 so far... so the final 3 come down really to: Broad and Wood (over Finn for additional pace and reverse swing in those conditions) with the third I guess being either Buttler, or an additional seam/spin option coming down to specific conditions.

Which is giving us:
Lyth
Cook
Hales
Root
Bairstow
Stokes
Ali
Rashid
Broad
Wood
A N Other

I'm unsure about the 11th. I think there's enough batting already but equally there's the issue of is Bairstow's glovework good enough especially for spin in those conditions, or would we consider the damage to Buttler's confidence if we drop him now? Do we need a 4th seamer in the UAE (almost certainly not)... so then who is the spinner, Dawson? again does that load the batting too much without improving the spin significantly? hard to know...

 

[Aislabie]

If you're going to rest Buttler at any point, you do it on t20 or one day cricket.

Entirely disagree - why rest him from the formats where he's world class to keep him fresh for the one where he's barely worth his place?

Flogging Jimmy on a dead pitch when he's just had a side injury and we've South Africa to come is not really advisable in my book.

Pretty reasonable. He certainly shouldn't be playing the fifth Test of the Ashes when there's no need.

I'd drop Bell

I certainly can't disagree with the reasoning. He only really keeps his place for me due the lack of alternatives.

Lyth
Cook
Hales
Root
Bairstow
Stokes
Ali
Rashid
Broad
Wood
A N Other

Not too bad a side really. I don't know about Lyth, although I wouldn't be surprised if they do give him another go. He's someone I really want to see succeed, but the more he gets out the same way the more I worry about him. With those players, I'd probably bring in Bell for Lyth (Hales to open) and get a proper gloveman to bat at eight or nine. A solid side with good reasoning, though.

 

[blockerdave]

Not too bad a side really. I don't know about Lyth, although I wouldn't be surprised if they do give him another go. He's someone I really want to see succeed, but the more he gets out the same way the more I worry about him. With those players, I'd probably bring in Bell for Lyth (Hales to open) and get a proper gloveman to bat at eight or nine. A solid side with good reasoning, though.

Well yeah if he gets out the same way again in the 5th test (should he play) then i'd say he has to go and we're looking for an alternative opener or 3 (if hales opens). then it's anybody but bell, up to and including exhuming the body of HRJ Charlwood.

 

[bigred]

Personally, I'd rest Jimmy for the Pakistan/UAE. Flogging Jimmy on a dead pitch when he's just had a side injury and we've South Africa to come is not really advisable in my book.

Shocking I know, but I'd drop Bell and get a number 3 bedded in. Bell can't play spin and SA would be all over him: he needs to go. Provided Lyth doesn't get out in the same fashion in the 5th test, I'd give him that less pressurised series in the UAE to try and nail the spot down: we've been through altogether far too many openers and we need to try and back one. I want to keep Root at 4, and would try Hales at 3 in UAE where you'd hope he can play freely without too much movement.

I think Bairstow and Stokes should be in, Ali and Rashid for spin - maybe take Dawson in the squad for experience and backup. so this is giving us a team of 8 so far... so the final 3 come down really to: Broad and Wood (over Finn for additional pace and reverse swing in those conditions) with the third I guess being either Buttler, or an additional seam/spin option coming down to specific conditions.

Which is giving us:
Lyth
Cook
Hales
Root
Bairstow
Stokes
Ali
Rashid
Broad
Wood
A N Other

I'm unsure about the 11th. I think there's enough batting already but equally there's the issue of is Bairstow's glovework good enough especially for spin in those conditions, or would we consider the damage to Buttler's confidence if we drop him now? Do we need a 4th seamer in the UAE (almost certainly not)... so then who is the spinner, Dawson? again does that load the batting too much without improving the spin significantly? hard to know...

So you're sticking with Lyth but dropping Bell? That seems a little bizarre to me.

A few people on here are talking about resting Anderson for the Pakistak series. Facts are, Jimmy was brilliant last time we went to the UAE and he bowled well when we won in India. The last two away series against Pakistan have been 2-0 and 3-0 defeats. This series isn't a time for resting players. It should be a priority. Winning there would be a far superior achievement than winning the Ashes at home in my opinion.

Liam Dawson is an interesting talking point. I'd worry that he'd be used like Samit Patel was in Sri Lanka. Having little effect with the ball, and not as good at batting as an alternative number 7 batsman.

 

[blockerdave]

So you're sticking with Lyth but dropping Bell? That seems a little bizarre to me.

A few people on here are talking about resting Anderson for the Pakistak series. Facts are, Jimmy was brilliant last time we went to the UAE and he bowled well when we won in India. The last two away series against Pakistan have been 2-0 and 3-0 defeats. This series isn't a time for resting players. It should be a priority. Winning there would be a far superior achievement than winning the Ashes at home in my opinion.

Liam Dawson is an interesting talking point. I'd worry that he'd be used like Samit Patel was in Sri Lanka. Having little effect with the ball, and not as good at batting as an alternative number 7 batsman.

The reasoning is:
Lyth has failed for 4 matches, Bell has failed for 2 years.
We have been through and discarded too many openers, I think we need to back one. Lyth hasn't made a particularly compelling case to be that one, but he's in possession now, must have been picked for a reason and is 4 matches away from an excellent hundred vs a very good NZ attack (that, incidentally, humiliated Bell). Subject to an improved performance in the 5th test (if he's picked), I'd give him one more chance in a less pressurised series than the Ashes.
Bell has played over 100 matches, and is in a deep slump that has lasted since the end of the 2013 Ashes. I can't think of many players who have suddenly improved 10 years into their international career - he's clearly in decline. He is poor against spin and I think this Ashes should be a watershed where we start to look to the future.

I can take on board what you say re Jimmy - and you're right that winning there would be huge. I would personally prioritise South Africa and rest him for that but i see your logic too.

 

[cooks1st100]

My worry with Lyth at the moment is that his only decent score for England was on his home ground. He has failed everywhere else. As far as replacements go Carberry and Compton are not getting any younger and apart from Hales who people are championing, I don't know who else is knocking on the door. Maybe Nick Browne who is young and batting well, but only playing in Div 2.

 

[bigred]

My worry with Lyth at the moment is that his only decent score for England was on his home ground. He has failed everywhere else. As far as replacements go Carberry and Compton are not getting any younger and apart from Hales who people are championing, I don't know who else is knocking on the door. Maybe Nick Browne who is young and batting well, but only playing in Div 2.

Browne also bats at the same tempo as Cook. Not sure that's what we need. I'm really hoping Alex Lees comes good.

 

[cooks1st100]

Browne also bats at the same tempo as Cook. Not sure that's what we need. I'm really hoping Alex Lees comes good.

They're opening batsman. It doesn't matter if they bat at a slow S/R, they need to be able to see off the new ball. Something that Compton for one, does well.

 

[bigred]

They're opening batsman. It doesn't matter if they bat at a slow S/R, they need to be able to see off the new ball. Something that Compton for one, does well.

I think we saw when we had Cook, Robson and Ballance at 123, that that brand of cricket isn't useful anymore. Whilst I agree that we still need people who can build 'test style' innings', most of the successful teams in the last 5 years haven't gone at 2.5 an over for the first 30. One of the openers usually takes the responsibility kick on and make use of the hard ball. Although Lyth has failed in this series, I do like his intent.

Somebody like a Hales would show intent, but I worry about his technique against quality test match attacks. What we need to find is a guy who knows where his off stump is and can play the moving ball, but is looking to attack first and defend or leave if it's a good ball. I don't think we have that in England right now unfortunately.

 

[cooks1st100]

I think we saw when we had Cook, Robson and Ballance at 123, that that brand of cricket isn't useful anymore. Whilst I agree that we still need people who can build 'test style' innings', most of the successful teams in the last 5 years haven't gone at 2.5 an over for the first 30. One of the openers usually takes the responsibility kick on and make use of the hard ball. Although Lyth has failed in this series, I do like his intent.

Somebody like a Hales would show intent, but I worry about his technique against quality test match attacks. What we need to find is a guy who knows where his off stump is and can play the moving ball, but is looking to attack first and defend or leave if it's a good ball. I don't think we have that in England right now unfortunately.

Michael Carberry but at 34 he isn't a long term answer, plus he was treated poorly by the England management after the last Ashes in Aus. But I disagree with what you are saying about run-rates, South Africa very often score at a slowish rate. You only have to look at what's happened to Australia as to where inappropriately aggressive cricket can often get you. Test matches are 5 days, they're a marathon, not a sprint. The morning session is quite often pinnacle to a team's innings, especially in England. A number 3 would much rather come in at 50-1 to face a 25 over old ball than 50-1 to face a 10 over old one.

 

[bigred]

Michael Carberry but at 34 he isn't a long term answer, plus he was treated poorly by the England management after the last Ashes in Aus. But I disagree with what you are saying about run-rates, South Africa very often score at a slowish rate. You only have to look at what's happened to Australia as to where inappropriately aggressive cricket can often get you. Test matches are 5 days, they're a marathon, not a sprint. The morning session is quite often pinnacle to a team's innings, especially in England. A number 3 would much rather come in at 50-1 to face a 25 over old ball than 50-1 to face a 10 over old one.

There's a big difference to the way Australia have played and how I think somebody like Alex Hales would play to the way South Africa have gone about going at a good run rate.

Players like Graeme Smith and Hashim Amla were/are very good players, with good techniques. They instinct is to attack bowling rather than defend though. England's top 3 last summer got into the mindset of defending first and I don't want to go back to that again.

To be honest, with Ian a Bell at 3, somebody like a Nick Browne or Nick Compton might not be such a bad thing.

 

[richowebbo]

The reasoning is:
Lyth has failed for 4 matches, Bell has failed for 2 years.
We have been through and discarded too many openers, I think we need to back one. Lyth hasn't made a particularly compelling case to be that one, but he's in possession now, must have been picked for a reason and is 4 matches away from an excellent hundred vs a very good NZ attack (that, incidentally, humiliated Bell). Subject to an improved performance in the 5th test (if he's picked), I'd give him one more chance in a less pressurised series than the Ashes.
Bell has played over 100 matches, and is in a deep slump that has lasted since the end of the 2013 Ashes. I can't think of many players who have suddenly improved 10 years into their international career - he's clearly in decline. He is poor against spin and I think this Ashes should be a watershed where we start to look to the future.

I can take on board what you say re Jimmy - and you're right that winning there would be huge. I would personally prioritise South Africa and rest him for that but i see your logic too.

Have to agree. I've watched loads of Lyth and he is a good player. He is a good fielder and seems to have settled in to the squad in terms of personality. How many more openers will we get through and not give time to? The only other option is to bring in Hales now and stick with him for a long time.

Bell looked better at 3 on his home pitch, and was crap again at TB, but at least his fielding improved. This means that we should only pick Bell at Edgbaston!

Someone who has gotten away with minimal criticism from the media is Butler. Truly dreadful with the bat, some dodgy patches with the gloves (alongside some amazingly good catches) and in my opinion should not be picked for Tests. Jonny B is good enough with the gloves and a far better batsmen, at least in Test matches. This would open up space for Rashid to come in for UAE.

Just read an article on BBC about someone called Mason Crane. Anyone seen him play live?

 

[richowebbo]

There's a big difference to the way Australia have played and how I think somebody like Alex Hales would play to the way South Africa have gone about going at a good run rate.

Players like Graeme Smith and Hashim Amla were/are very good players, with good techniques. They instinct is to attack bowling rather than defend though. England's top 3 last summer got into the mindset of defending first and I don't want to go back to that again.

To be honest, with Ian a Bell at 3, somebody like a Nick Browne or Nick Compton might not be such a bad thing.

I'd replace Bell with Compton at 3. I've banging on about him for ages it feels like! Sorry!

 

[cooks1st100]

in for UAE.
Just read an article on BBC about someone called Mason Crane. Anyone seen him play live?

I know he plays for Hampshire and he took 5 wickets on his FC debut. But that's it, I'll have to check out this BBC article.

 

[blockerdave]

Have to agree. I've watched loads of Lyth and he is a good player. He is a good fielder and seems to have settled in to the squad in terms of personality. How many more openers will we get through and not give time to? The only other option is to bring in Hales now and stick with him for a long time.

Bell looked better at 3 on his home pitch, and was crap again at TB, but at least his fielding improved. This means that we should only pick Bell at Edgbaston!

Someone who has gotten away with minimal criticism from the media is Butler. Truly dreadful with the bat, some dodgy patches with the gloves (alongside some amazingly good catches) and in my opinion should not be picked for Tests. Jonny B is good enough with the gloves and a far better batsmen, at least in Test matches. This would open up space for Rashid to come in for UAE.

Just read an article on BBC about someone called Mason Crane. Anyone seen him play live?

Support Yorkshire perchance?