The Ashes (Australia tour of England)

[Willoughby63]

That is important for Bairstow

 

[Dutch]

Nicely Jinxed

Well they are telegraphing the short ball: just leave it: let them run themselves into the ground, bang it in all you want mate.

 

[Aislabie]

Love watching the slo-mo of Stuart Broad playing a full-blooded pull and Bancroft not ducking, not even flinching as it whistles past his ear at short-leg

 

[Dutch]

England just have no cricketing IQ, just none. So so predictable. I sound negative but If we arent able to bat on a batting wicket in our conditions......

 

[Aislabie]

England just have no cricketing IQ, just none. So so predictable. I sound negative but If we arent able to bat on a batting wicket in our conditions......

What would your XI be for the third Test? Assuming for the time being that Archer and Leach both bowl well and Jimmy isn't fit

 

[Dutch]

What would your XI be for the third Test? Assuming for the time being that Archer and Leach both bowl well and Jimmy isn't fit

Off the top of my head without thinking too much about it....not sure about the batting lineup around woakes foakes and curran...,,


Sibley
Burns
Root
Bairstow
Stokes
Curran
Foakes (W)
Woakes
Archer
Broad
Leach

 

[Bevab]

England is going to need Foakes just for keeping to Archer alone. His seam position is really good!

This has to be one of the most hyped debuts for an English player in tests if I’m correct.

 

[Aislabie]

Sibley
Burns
Root
Bairstow
Stokes
Curran
Foakes (W)
Woakes
Archer
Broad
Leach

I see what you're going for here, but it does rather go in the opposite direction to the one I'd be looking at. There are very few specialists in that team.

1. Rory Burns
2. Dom Sibley
3. To be confirmed
4. Joe Root
5. To be confirmed
6. Ben Stokes
7. To be confirmed
8. Chris Woakes
9. Jofra Archer
10. Stuart Broad
11. Jack Leach *

So addressing each of those three positions I've not confirmed yet:

• Number three: Here I'd probably be inclined to keep Denly (504 Div 1 runs @ 56.00) for the sake of continuity. There's no guarantee that any of Ballance (850 Div 1 runs @ 56.67), Malan (885 Div 2 runs @ 63.21) or Vince (no runs or form but a beautiful cover drive) would do significantly better.
• Number five: I really want to keep Jos Buttler here, but he's really not looking like a Test batsman and has only one first-class hundred in five years. Options include Bairstow, Hain (623 Div 1 runs @ 51.92), Northeast (815 Div 1 runs @ 62.69) and Pope (only one match this season). On balance, I would reward the form man.
• Wicket-keeper: Bairstow did just make a fifty, and is the incumbent. Jos Buttler is also struggling to justify a place anywhere else in the side. For me it has to be Foakes, which will of course complete the holy trinity in the engine room of the side.
• The spinner: According to the premise of the question, Jack Leach will bowl well and retains his place. But when he inevitably doesn't and concedes a thousand runs to Steve Smith, I'd want to select Matt Parkinson. But I'd also probably wait until after this series so as to not scar him with a 5-0 at home.

Therefore:

1. Rory Burns
2. Dom Sibley
3. Joe Denly
4. Joe Root
5. Sam Northeast
6. Ben Stokes
7. Ben Foakes
8. Chris Woakes
9. Jofra Archer
10. Stuart Broad
11. Jack Leach

 

[Dutch]

I see what you're going for here, but it does rather go in the opposite direction to the one I'd be looking at. There are very few specialists in that team.

1. Rory Burns
2. Dom Sibley
3. To be confirmed
4. Joe Root
5. To be confirmed
6. Ben Stokes
7. To be confirmed
8. Chris Woakes
9. Jofra Archer
10. Stuart Broad
11. Jack Leach *

So addressing each of those three positions I've not confirmed yet:

• Number three: Here I'd probably be inclined to keep Denly (504 Div 1 runs @ 56.00) for the sake of continuity. There's no guarantee that any of Ballance (850 Div 1 runs @ 56.67), Malan (885 Div 2 runs @ 63.21) or Vince (no runs or form but a beautiful cover drive) would do significantly better.
• Number five: I really want to keep Jos Buttler here, but he's really not looking like a Test batsman and has only one first-class hundred in five years. Options include Bairstow, Hain (623 Div 1 runs @ 51.92), Northeast (815 Div 1 runs @ 62.69) and Pope (only one match this season). On balance, I would reward the form man.
• Wicket-keeper: Bairstow did just make a fifty, and is the incumbent. Jos Buttler is also struggling to justify a place anywhere else in the side. For me it has to be Foakes, which will of course complete the holy trinity in the engine room of the side.
• The spinner: According to the premise of the question, Jack Leach will bowl well and retains his place. But when he inevitably doesn't and concedes a thousand runs to Steve Smith, I'd want to select Matt Parkinson. But I'd also probably wait until after this series so as to not scar him with a 5-0 at home.

Therefore:

1. Rory Burns
2. Dom Sibley
3. Joe Denly
4. Joe Root
5. Sam Northeast
6. Ben Stokes
7. Ben Foakes
8. Chris Woakes
9. Jofra Archer
10. Stuart Broad
11. Jack Leach

Yeah I could live with that but not keen in Denly: I just dont see that there can be much future in him. He is a good player but not good enough to stuck with him imo but the question rises who then. A good point was made on TMS about the technical fragilities being shown: who is going about coaching these guys? Surely someone must have said to Roy for example lad tuck it in, see off the shine and get yourself in?


I dont see why curran cant get in the side.

 

[Aislabie]

Yeah I could live with that but not keen in Denly: I just dont see that there can be much future in him. He is a good player but not good enough to stuck with him imo but the question rises who then. A good point was made on TMS about the technical fragilities being shown: who is going about coaching these guys? Surely someone must have said to Roy for example lad tuck it in, see off the shine and get yourself in?

I dont see why curran cant get in the side.

To address these points in order:

• I'm not keen on Denly either; I'd only be keeping him as a stop-gap until some of the other batsmen had started to settle in, otherwise I'd have a top-five with so many debutants that it'd be almost as brittle as it is already. But I agree with you that he's probably not the future even though he has a very pretty cover drive a bit like James Vince.
• Yeah, coaching in the system is absolutely dreadful - or at least it was when I was growing up and I'm roughly the same vintage as the young players coming through at the minute. I think I've written before of my experience working with Steve Rhodes at Worcestershire (and his being a sadistic prick, as well as his using fielding as a punishment) but overwhelmingly there are two conflicting schools of thought: the first is to Trust Your Natural Game™ (Bayliss) and the second is to break a player's technique and resolve down to nothing, then rebuild them into the player you want (Rhodes). Obviously neither is a good option because the first doesn't fix things that a player might be doing inherently wrong, like JRoy's hard hard hands, and the second leaves players so fixated on trying to do things as they were taught that their thought processes become entirely muddled as soon as things go wrong, like Keaton Jennings confronted with an Indian seamer.
• Curran can't get into the side because he's fighting with Stokes and Woakes for two spots in the team; he's not a better seamer than Broad or Archer, and he's not a better Test all-rounder than Stokes or Woakes. If there's one thing that this England side has recently demonstrated, trying to square-peg a player into a role that isn't really their own in order to fit the most talented eleven players into the side doesn't necessarily make for the best possible team.

 

[Jalen]

Unpopular opinion? People must be really stupid if they think otherwise. Starc is an overrated bowler in test cricket. He is an absolute gun in limited overs but I can't say the same about test cricket.

True but Hazlewood has been overshadowed by Starc for a long time now, people seem to forget that Hazlewood was the no.1 ranked ODI bowled for a good while too. Pace and aggression isn't only what makes up a good fast bowler. Even in the a World Cup Starc wasn't as consistent as he would've liked at the beginning of the tournament I fell, but Hazlewood will be consistent 9/10 times he bowls in ODI and Test Cricket. I wouldn't say Starc is overrated in test cricket, he just has a problem with consistency, which you need the most of in this format especially.

My opinion:

Limited Overs: Starc>Hazlewood>Cummins
Test: Cummins>Hazlewood>Starc

 

[LiveLoveABD]

True but Hazlewood has been overshadowed by Starc for a long time now, people seem to forget that Hazlewood was the no.1 ranked ODI bowled for a good while too. Pace and aggression isn't only what makes up a good fast bowler. Even in the a World Cup Starc wasn't as consistent as he would've liked at the beginning of the tournament I fell, but Hazlewood will be consistent 9/10 times he bowls in ODI and Test Cricket. I wouldn't say Starc is overrated in test cricket, he just has a problem with consistency, which you need the most of in this format especially.

My opinion:

Limited Overs: Starc>Hazlewood>Cummins
Test: Cummins>Hazlewood>Starc

In my opinion, Cummins is in the middle on both and has Starc and Hazlewood either side of him. Starc in LOI and Hazlewood in tests.

The irony is, Pat Cummins would play anywhere in the world. Can't say that about Starc or Hazlewood.

 

[wasteyouryouth]

To address these points in order:

• I'm not keen on Denly either; I'd only be keeping him as a stop-gap until some of the other batsmen had started to settle in, otherwise I'd have a top-five with so many debutants that it'd be almost as brittle as it is already. But I agree with you that he's probably not the future even though he has a very pretty cover drive a bit like James Vince.
• Yeah, coaching in the system is absolutely dreadful - or at least it was when I was growing up and I'm roughly the same vintage as the young players coming through at the minute. I think I've written before of my experience working with Steve Rhodes at Worcestershire (and his being a sadistic prick, as well as his using fielding as a punishment) but overwhelmingly there are two conflicting schools of thought: the first is to Trust Your Natural Game™ (Bayliss) and the second is to break a player's technique and resolve down to nothing, then rebuild them into the player you want (Rhodes). Obviously neither is a good option because the first doesn't fix things that a player might be doing inherently wrong, like JRoy's hard hard hands, and the second leaves players so fixated on trying to do things as they were taught that their thought processes become entirely muddled as soon as things go wrong, like Keaton Jennings confronted with an Indian seamer.
• Curran can't get into the side because he's fighting with Stokes and Woakes for two spots in the team; he's not a better seamer than Broad or Archer, and he's not a better Test all-rounder than Stokes or Woakes. If there's one thing that this England side has recently demonstrated, trying to square-peg a player into a role that isn't really their own in order to fit the most talented eleven players into the side doesn't necessarily make for the best possible team.

The selection policy has been a bit of a shambles since Ed Smith took over. I always go back to the fact that Buttler was picked after a good IPL and as a specialist number 7. Now he finds himself at 5 on the back of a couple of 50s and Jonny Bairstow's seeming infallibility when it comes to getting his own way.

Roy gets in the side on the back of one day form in a position he's hardly played in and a format he's and played two matches in two season. Denly, I feel bad for. He's actually forced his way into the side on merit in red ball cricket, yet gets shunted around to fill whatever hole England are trying to fill.

The other issue is most of the side have played hardly any red ball cricket this season - although the same could be said of some Australian players, the difference being those that are in are proven test batsman.

England seem to have 11 or 12 players they want to be their test team, problem is half of them are fast bowlers and the rest are unproven or woefully out of form. If they do lose the Ashes then some heads should roll. If not, you really have to question what's going on.

 

[Deleted member 193590]

I think Roy should definitely be given more time,to be fair to him he's having a better Ashes than David Warner,can't expect him to come in and smack hundreds straight away.He just needs time to adapt to Test cricket.We have a perfect replacement for Denly in Sam Hain.

 

[Dutch]

I think Roy should definitely be given more time,to be fair to him he's having a better Ashes than David Warner,can't expect him to come in and smack hundreds straight away.He just needs time to adapt to Test cricket.We have a perfect replacement for Denly in Sam Hain.

To be fair even Jimmy A is having a better Ashes than Warner.