Third Test: Australia v England at Edgbaston

[aussie1st]

From what the curator said, spin won't play much of a factor and that County spinners have been struggling. So the all out pace attack could be an option meaning no need for Watson.

 

[angryangy]

I could see McDonald replacing Hauritz if it's got an inch of green grass on it, but otherwise it just sounds like a smokescreen.

 

[Cricketdude]

I could see McDonald replacing Hauritz if it's got an inch of green grass on it, but otherwise it just sounds like a smokescreen.

Oh yeah, just replace the highest wicket taker of the series.

 

[angryangy]

he wouldn't be if the first two matches had been greentops

 

[Howsie]

Oh yeah, just replace the highest wicket taker of the series.

He's bowled alright but he hasn't been that great. Haurtiz has just looked a lot better because of the trash that's been bowling with him

 

[Cricketdude]

It's harder to bowl when your teams is playing worse IMO.

 

[Aditya]

It's harder to bowl when your teams is playing worse IMO.

Yes right it is really hard to bowl when your team is not playing well and when your team is 1-0 down.

 

[Cricketdude]

he wouldn't be if the first two matches had been greentops

So swann shouldn't be in the English side?

 

[Howsie]

It's harder to bowl when your teams is playing worse IMO.

True

But Hauritz hasn't been that fantastic that he can't get the chop if needed

 

[Cricketdude]

But he's got more wickets than both Panesar and Swann. Australia need to stick with a spinner instead of chopping and changing.

 

[Owzat]

I think they will drop Onions for Harmison, simply because you cannot drop Broad without having a long vulnerable tail.

I don't know, if Flintoff plays then he will be at seven, Swann is good enough number to bat eight, while Harmison and Anderson are no mugs if not guaranteed runs (how many Tests without a duck for Anderson?)

Ashes 08/09

Swann 82 runs @ 41.00
Anderson 76 runs @ 38.00
Flintoff 97 runs @ 32.33
Onions 17 runs @ n/a*
Broad 49 runs @ 16.33
Panesar 11 runs @ 11.00

*but will be at least 17.00 next time he is out

Broad is FIFTH in the England bowling averages, out of six main bowlers used. His four wickets have cost 64 apiece. So his bowling average is nearly FOUR times his batting average, the case for his continued inclusion is based on theoretical batting and bowling rather than actual. His HS of 19 is only better than Onions' 17no and Panesar's 7no, so much for adding 'batting strength'

 

[Jakester1288]

If I were Australia I'd leave the batting as it is, and so leave Watson out.

The only change would be to introduce Clark for one of Hilfenhaus or Siddle.

So you are effectively saying to leave Johnson in the side because he offers runs with the bat?

 

[Howsie]

I don't know, if Flintoff plays then he will be at seven, Swann is good enough number to bat eight, while Harmison and Anderson are no mugs if not guaranteed runs (how many Tests without a duck for Anderson?)

Ashes 08/09

Swann 82 runs @ 41.00
Anderson 76 runs @ 38.00
Flintoff 97 runs @ 32.33
Onions 17 runs @ n/a*
Broad 49 runs @ 16.33
Panesar 11 runs @ 11.00

*but will be at least 17.00 next time he is out

Broad is FIFTH in the England bowling averages, out of six main bowlers used. His four wickets have cost 64 apiece. So his bowling average is nearly FOUR times his batting average, the case for his continued inclusion is based on theoretical batting and bowling rather than actual. His HS of 19 is only better than Onions' 17no and Panesar's 7no, so much for adding 'batting strength'

With England one up in the series they will not drop Broad now. Although the stats don't lie, he's such an overrated batsmen

 

[piriyanth]

Eight days of speculation, debate and general gum-flapping over Mitchell Johnson's selection prospects could amount to nothing. The embattled paceman is favoured to retain his place in the side for the third Test at Edgbaston, increasing the likelihood that the tourists will field a line-up similar, if not identical, to that which slumped to a 115-run defeat at Lord's last week.

Given the contrasting nature of Johnson's performance at Wantage Road (1 for 107 from 18.1 overs), many assumed Clark would enter the starting XI for the third Test in a straight-swap for the errant left-hander. But Johnson, it seems, has retained the faith of Ricky Ponting and Jamie Cox, Australia's on-duty selector, all but ensuring that the tourists must look elsewhere within their line-up if they are to accommodate Clark.

Of all the Australia bowlers in this series, Peter Siddle has performed the most modestly, and, like Johnson, has been unable to settle upon a consistent line. Siddle, though, has many influential supporters in the Australian hierarchy - not least Ponting and Tim Nielsen - who covet the raw aggression and intimidation he brings to the attack. He will be difficult to dislodge, even if raw figures (seven wickets at 44.57) suggest he is the most likely to make way

Australia's Clark conundrum | Cricket Features | The Ashes - England v Australia 2009 | Cricinfo.com

Looks like it's going to be the same line up as the last test or maybe Clark in for Siddle.

 

[aussie1st]

No no no no no!
We can't go in with both Siddle and Johnson again, unless Siddle finds his line and length. But how can they ignore Clark's form not to mention his top class Test record.