Unofficial Buildup to the 2010/11 Ashes

He's injured...though as I type this, I realise that might be a pun.

Tbh, Monty and Bresnan have been selected as back-ups, so why are people lambasting our chances because of that, given they are almost certainly not going to be playing?
 
I think it will be an incredibly good tour, their is a MASSIVE difference in the squads since the last tour in Australia when the infamous whitewash occured. Would be interesting to see how many survivors there actually are from each tour.

Well comparing the squads from 06/07 is useless TBH, but you can compare the 2009 squads. That's more interesting to me, since Australia actually could feel quite unlucky to lose in '09, they thwarted Swann nicely (until the Oval) and dominated the runs and wickets tallies, yet a couple of bad collapses cost them dearly. You'd think given Australia is at home this time, they would be feeling better placed.

Anyway, England have lost Flintoff, Bopara, Harmison and Onions from that series and have picked Bresnan, Morgan, Finn and Tremlett instead. Is that such a big improvement?? Potentially I guess, given the Finn hype, Morgan's ODI performances and Warney saying Tremlett could be the best bowler in world cricket with a bit more aggression, but I think England would still like a fit Flintoff, and possibly Onions too. I'm not really arguing, more of a discussion point.

Australia meanwhile will be very similar with the only changes being in the fast bowling. Stuart Clark and possibly Peter Siddle will be out, with Doug Bollinger and maybe young Peter George as their replacements. That's a reasonable improvement in my eyes, as I don't rate Siddle much and Clark is past it. And I guess Marcus North may be toast by then too. The only other real development is that Steve Smith is lurking if a 2nd spinner is wanted or a more bold choice to replace North if necessary.

Thats would poor tactics. If Swann gets injured, Panesar cannot play since he is not good enough to be the main spinner in a 4-man man - it is that obvious.

I find it amusing that Monty took almost as many wickets in his 3 '06/07 Tests as Swann took in his 5 '09 Tests, yet you think the appearance of Monty dooms England straight away? Everyone is snorting some serious Swann dust if you ask me. Let's see if Swann can get out some right handers before we crown him Mr England. In 09 he got only 4 in the 5 Tests, Clarke yorked himself, Ponting got a beauty, Stuart Clark was a bat pad that wasn't out and Haddin holed out to midwicket. That's NOT impressive.

Anyway, I think team's need a spinner - as you know. I think England would be far better off with Panesar than Bresnan.
 
Panesar cannot play since he is not good enough to be the main spinner in a 4-man man - it is that obvious.

Its not as though he's got a very good international record that many spinners would be proud of despite the fact he never really improved as a player during his England tenure...

Added to that he's been in very good form for Sussex, has by all accounts improved as a person (as in he has started to do things for himself such as picking his own fields this year) and has started to differ the way in which he bowls so he's not bowling the same thing over and over again (he no longer bowls 56mph regardless of the condtitions! Huzzah!)

I dont know how Australia have "as many weak links" as us???. The only weak link AUS have is that since 2006/07, their batsmen have developed a the tendancy to have dumb batting collapses. Which is basicaly ENGs hope really to hope really, but once AUS bat to potential, ENG have no chance.

Ponting is out of form and England have gotten him out numerous time with the short ball during the ODI series which has just past. Likewise Clarke was bounced out quite a few times. Hussey's form hasn't been what it was a couple of years ago either. North has been poor for a while and looked completely clueless against Swann last time around. Haddin's a decent keeper and a dependable batsmen but he isn't going to set the world alight.

Moving onto the bowling there's Johnson who can be bloody awful at time while Hauritz is distinctly average. Hilfy is good with the new ball but can be a bit toothless after the new balls worn off. And Siddle is quite erratic.

In comparison for to England. Cook is a worry very dodgy form in the last year and has a major flaw but he has past experience of scoring a century in Australia. KP could be a series winner but his form has been a worry albeit slightly eased by is scores for Surrey as is Colly a worry. Bell although he has had a bad time against Australia in the past but looks to be in the form of his life at the moment. Prior has looked an extremely good player in the last few years and his keeping is up their with the best in my opinion over the last year.

On the bowlers front, Swann is the best spinner in the world. Broad has come on leaps and bounds for me in the last year and is a steady solid performer with bat and ball. Anderson is in brilliant form but will have to prove himself in Australia. Finn has looked very good for England and Tremlett is a very solid bowler.

I'd say that the teams are rather even and Australia have quite a few weak links as do England.
 
I find it amusing that Monty took almost as many wickets in his 3 '06/07 Tests as Swann took in his 5 '09 Tests, yet you think the appearance of Monty dooms England straight away? Everyone is snorting some serious Swann dust if you ask me. Let's see if Swann can get out some right handers before we crown him Mr England. In 09 he got only 4 in the 5 Tests, Clarke yorked himself, Ponting got a beauty, Stuart Clark was a bat pad that wasn't out and Haddin holed out to midwicket. That's NOT impressive.

Anyway, I think team's need a spinner - as you know. I think England would be far better off with Panesar than Bresnan.

Am i would think its fialry obvious Swann has imporved immensely since that 2009 Ashes. So that comparison is not valid my friend. Plus all the hype Swann is getting ATM is 100% deserved.

On Panesar as i mentioned before. During the 2006/07 was during his 1st year of international cricket where he was a bit of unknown to international batsmen & he had his success. Panesar then in the 2007 home summer vs IND was decoded & he became a joke. He has not improved since then. So it is quite clear the Panesar of 2006/07 is not the same bowler today - he is not good enough to play as part of a 4-man attack.

Bresnan shouldn't be in the team either. So as i said from the start if the unthikable happens & Swann was to get injured. The safest option for ENG would be to pick a 4th seamer. Simple.


Sureshot said:
He's injured...though as I type this, I realise that might be a pun

Tbh, Monty and Bresnan have been selected as back-ups, so why are people lambasting our chances because of that, given they are almost certainly not going to be playing?.

You dont pick backup players just to make up numbers. You pick them with the clear assertion that if they are needed to be called up due to injuries or lack of form to a player in the main XI - they can be fairly adequate replacements. Under no circumstances would Bresnan & Panesar be adequate replacements Australia.
 
Last edited:
You dont pick backup players just to make up numbers. You pick them with the clear assertion that if they are needed to be called up due to injuries or lack of form to a player in the main XI - they can be fairly adequate replacements. Under no circumstances would Bresnan & Panesar be adequate replacements Australia.

Panesar's record says different, he's certainly capable at this level, is in form and has improved somewhat. And no one's doubt the fact that Bresnan is shite, as I've said in this thread earlier (I think) I fully expect Shahzad to take to the field should one of England's fast bowlers go down. He is basically a 17th man as he will be with the team for all the warm ups and whereas the others in the performance squad will not.
 
Its not as though he's got a very good international record that many spinners would be proud of despite the fact he never really improved as a player during his England tenure...

Added to that he's been in very good form for Sussex, has by all accounts improved as a person (as in he has started to do things for himself such as picking his own fields this year) and has started to differ the way in which he bowls so he's not bowling the same thing over and over again (he no longer bowls 56mph regardless of the condtitions! Huzzah!)

I dont know how averaging 34 is anything. But between IND 2007 - Ashes 09 (Cardiff test) he was horribly poor. Panesar clealry had ALOTT of work to do to rekindle his ealry glory during his 1st year year on international test cricket

Again did you see him actually bowl this season in FC cricket or are you making asusmptioons that he may have improved??. Even if you did or the questionable ENG selectors did, as i said before i dont know how bowling & doing well againts mediocre batsmen in the poor 2nd division cricket is going to help him improve after just one year.

Those are wayy to much uncertainties for an Ashes squad selection. Maybe if the Ashes was next winter & he continued these performances when Sussex are in Division 1. But not no at all.



Ponting is out of form and England have gotten him out numerous time with the short ball during the ODI series which has just past. Likewise Clarke was bounced out quite a few times. Hussey's form hasn't been what it was a couple of years ago either. North has been poor for a while and looked completely clueless against Swann last time around. Haddin's a decent keeper and a dependable batsmen but he isn't going to set the world alight.

Moving onto the bowling there's Johnson who can be bloody awful at time while Hauritz is distinctly average. Hilfy is good with the new ball but can be a bit toothless after the new balls worn off. And Siddle is quite erratic.

Ponting is clearly passed his ulitmate peak & the short ball stuff is definately an area ENG willl Ponting will target him. But Ponting is too great a batsman for anyone to write off, with this potential being his swansong season as an international cricket (Ashes & World Cup), the man can very well rise to occassion & bring back that old spark.

Clarke has been AUS form batsman for the past 3 years. Couple good bouncers from Broad doesn't make him vulnerable at all. I expect him to be in the runs as usual.

Hussey is fine. His early WI 005/06 - IND 08/09 form has decreased. But since his Oval hundred in the final Ashes test last year, his test form in recent AUS tests have been fairly solid again.

Every AUS fan knows North should be dropped. Their is a good possibility he wont play in the Ashes anyway. AUS have depth in Hughes, Ferguson, D Hussey (although he wont be picked), Khawajala (spell check), Jaques, Rogers to call up when he dropped soon.

Haddin is indeed hit & miss. But if he can be consistent in the Ashes, he can definately tare ENG bowling apart in the odd innings.

Hilfenhaus is not toothless when the ball is not swinging compared to Anderson. He has shown he can reverse swing the old ball alreayd in his career.

You are right about Johnson. But most of his eratic bowling to date has occured outside Australia to be fair. In AUS to date he has always been good.

Siddle can be erratic yes. But once he gets the right conditions he is very dangerous. You also haven't mentioned Ryan Harris who could play a part in this series as well.

I dont rate Hauritz & i dont think he should be playing much, ENG batsmen should definately be able to take advantage of him. If AUS play an all-seam attack (as ive called for many times as some AUS posters on this forum know) - they bowling attack will be far more deadly for ENG batsmen.




In comparison for to England. Cook is a worry very dodgy form in the last year and has a major flaw but he has past experience of scoring a century in Australia. KP could be a series winner but his form has been a worry albeit slightly eased by is scores for Surrey as is Colly a worry. Bell although he has had a bad time against Australia in the past but looks to be in the form of his life at the moment. Prior has looked an extremely good player in the last few years and his keeping is up their with the best in my opinion over the last year.

On the bowlers front, Swann is the best spinner in the world. Broad has come on leaps and bounds for me in the last year and is a steady solid performer with bat and ball. Anderson is in brilliant form but will have to prove himself in Australia. Finn has looked very good for England and Tremlett is a very solid bowler.

I'd say that the teams are rather even and Australia have quite a few weak links as do England.

Cook having experience of scoring a hundred in AUS means nothing. Cook has not improved one ioata since the 2006/07 Ashes tour when facing quality fast-bowling. He is an accident waiting to happen, once AUS bowlers bowl to potential.

Overall if we are going on form, Strauss, Bell, Prior are the guys who have that. KP, Colly, Cook is very vulnerable. Although given his greatness i would back KP out of all of them to come good.

While for the bowling Swann alone can be surely depended on to take wickets. Anderson is still yet to prove he can bowl well on flat pitches. Braod will be solid instead of spectacular. While Finn & Tremlett although they have the attributes to bowl well in AUS conditions - they are still unknowns to a fair degree.

So overall its quite ENG have more weak links & unknowns that AUS by some way.
 
Again did you see him actually bowl this season in FC cricket or are you making asusmptioons that he may have improved??. Even if you did or the questionable ENG selectors did, as i said before i dont know how bowling & doing well againts mediocre batsmen in the poor 2nd division cricket is going to help him improve after just one year.

Yes I have seen him bowl and he bowled rather well in those matches too. But he's shown over the whole season he's been in decent form regardless of the times I've seen him bowl.

But Ponting is too great a batsman for anyone to write off

Ponting has been a great batsmen, yes. Is he still a great batsmen? No.

Hussey is fine. His early WI 005/06 - IND 08/09 form has decreased. But since his Oval hundred in the final Ashes test last year, his test form in recent AUS tests have been fairly solid again.

He's been nothing more than solid. Averaging 40 since just before the Ashes last time is going to frighten the English attack.

But if he can be consistent in the Ashes, he can definately tare ENG bowling apart in the odd innings.

I doubt that Haddin will be able to "tare" apart the England attack.

Hilfenhaus is not toothless when the ball is not swinging compared to Anderson.

Hilfenhaus isn't as good when the swing of the new ball has torn off; neither is Anderson.

Cook having experience of scoring a hundred in AUS means nothing. Cook has not improved one ioata since the 2006/07 Ashes tour when facing quality fast-bowling. He is an accident waiting to happen, once AUS bowlers bowl to potential.

Yes Cook has been out of form but you're still not giving the respect he's due. Last two years he's averaged 40 when in abhorrent form including averaging 41 with a century against South Africa (with arguably the best fast bowling line up during said period.

While Finn & Tremlett although they have the attributes to bowl well in AUS conditions - they are still unknowns to a fair degree.

Being an unknown quantity does mean they are weak links. Especially after the year that both have had.

So for me if we were looking at who'd you refer as potential weak links I'd go for Australia North and Hauritz whereas for England I'd go Cook and Colly. Barely England having way more weak links more a very even spread of people who could be potentially very poor (Cook/Colly & North/Hauritz) and those who could be indifferent (Hussey/Ponting/Haddin/Siddle & KP/Broad/Anderson/Bell).
 
Yes I have seen him bowl and he bowled rather well in those matches too. But he's shown over the whole season he's been in decent form regardless of the times I've seen him bowl.

But he was bowling to Division 2 batsmen. How is that good preparaiton for the AUS batsmen. Does that not worry you & make you skeptical??


Ponting has been a great batsmen, yes. Is he still a great batsmen? No.


He is still a great batsman. Just one slightly past his peaked. Its not as if his drop in form & consistently is comparable to Viv Richards in the last 3 years of his career (1988-1991) or Tendulkar during his 2002-2007/08 for example . So it would very unwise for ENG bowlers or fans to think just because he is showing some vulnerability againts the short-ball that he still cant rise to occassion, in what i said could be the most important summer of his illustrious career.


He's been nothing more than solid. Averaging 40 since just before the Ashes last time is going to frighten the English attack.

It doesn't have to firighten the ENG attack. It just shows he is not a weak link batsman going into the Ashes.



I doubt that Haddin will be able to "tare" apart the England attack.

Where where you when he did so @ Cardiff & Lords in the last Ashes?.

If fears of Anderson not being able to get the ball to reverse swing on those flat pitches materialize & Haddin comes into back @ 300 for 5 or something . He can very well & tare into our bowlers.

Hilfenhaus isn't as good when the swing of the new ball has torn off; neither is Anderson.

No. Hilfenhaus has proven already that he can be effective with the old ball consistently in his career. As shown in SOuth Africa 09 & Ashes 09. Something Anderson has yet to do.

If you have skysports, watch the IND vs AUS series & you will see the reverse-swing Hilfy gets.

Yes Cook has been out of form but you're still not giving the respect he's due. Last two years he's averaged 40 when in abhorrent form including averaging 41 with a century against South Africa (with arguably the best fast bowling line up during said period.

If you give a batsmen enough chances he will score centuries. Cook doesn't need no respect. He as not improved technically since he was first exposed in the 2006/07 Ashes.

Cook would have been dropped if we had a better options. Especially if Trescothick was available to play for ENG still.


Being an unknown quantity does mean they are weak links. Especially after the year that both have had.

Of course being an unknown makes you a weak link. Many players have done well & gone down to AUS & failed/struggled. Finn although he impressed had a easy introduction againts weak batting line-up vs BANG & PAK. The Ashes will be his 1st serious againts strong opposition, anything can happen, the AUS batsmen can target him & cripple him or he can step up. Given that obvious lack of certaintly, he goes into the Ashes a weak link.

Same things goes for Tremlett.

So for me if we were looking at who'd you refer as potential weak links I'd go for Australia North and Hauritz whereas for England I'd go Cook and Colly. Barely England having way more weak links more a very even spread of people who could be potentially very poor (Cook/Colly & North/Hauritz) and those who could be indifferent (Hussey/Ponting/Haddin/Siddle & KP/Broad/Anderson/Bell).

Na.

For ENG all the batsmen except Strauss, Prior & Bell (although i would back KP to rise up) & all the bowlers except Swann (given especialy Anderson is yet to prove he can bowl well to top batsmen if the ball is not swinging).

For AUS. Its just their batsmen tendancy to have batting collapses. But if all cylinders click - they should not be in too much trouble from ENG.
 
Can I get a word in?? :p

Am i would think its fialry obvious Swann has imporved immensely since that 2009 Ashes. So that comparison is not valid my friend. Plus all the hype Swann is getting ATM is 100% deserved.

On Panesar as i mentioned before. During the 2006/07 was during his 1st year of international cricket where he was a bit of unknown to international batsmen & he had his success.

What awesomeness has Swann achieved since 2009? Well, he bowled fairly well in SA, but I'm not giving much credence to his performances against Bangladesh and a suspicious Pakistan. Against SA he averaged 31.38 - which is pretty decent for a modern spinner (yet you bash Monty's 34 average...), while against Bang and Pak he averaged 20.07. And in the last Ashes he averaged 40.50. I'd be willing to bet he averages over 30 in this Ashes.

I'm not arguing that Monty is better than Swann, I'm pointing out that Swann is getting unabashed fan worship despite an ordinary 2009 Ashes while Monty has been written off by everyone, including you, yet you admit YOU HAVEN'T EVEN SEEN HIM BOWL this season. I haven't seen him bowl either, but I'm not going to write him off before I do.


And this isn't for you War, but a point in general: if Swann bowled badly in 2009 and is going to be much improved... what about Mitchell Johnson? He bowled absolute trollop in '09. Why isn't he going to be much improved as well?
 
Can I get a word in?? :p



What awesomeness has Swann achieved since 2009? Well, he bowled fairly well in SA, but I'm not giving much credence to his performances against Bangladesh and a suspicious Pakistan. Against SA he averaged 31.38 - which is pretty decent for a modern spinner (yet you bash Monty's 34 average...), while against Bang and Pak he averaged 20.07. And in the last Ashes he averaged 40.50. I'd be willing to bet he averages over 30 in this Ashes.

I'm not arguing that Monty is better than Swann, I'm pointing out that Swann is getting unabashed fan worship despite an ordinary 2009 Ashes while Monty has been written off by everyone, including you, yet you admit YOU HAVEN'T EVEN SEEN HIM BOWL this season. I haven't seen him bowl either, but I'm not going to write him off before I do.


And this isn't for you War, but a point in general: if Swann bowled badly in 2009 and is going to be much improved... what about Mitchell Johnson? He bowled absolute trollop in '09. Why isn't he going to be much improved as well?

I haven't fully read through the thread, so someone might have posted this already, but this Cricinfo article shows Swann to have been the most effective wicket-taking spinner in the world since January last year

The Numbers Game: The best spinner in all formats | Regulars | Cricinfo Magazine | Cricinfo.com
 
For ENG all the batsmen except Strauss, Prior & Bell (although i would back KP to rise up) & all the bowlers except Swann (given especialy Anderson is yet to prove he can bowl well to top batsmen if the ball is not swinging).

For AUS. Its just their batsmen tendancy to have batting collapses. But if all cylinders click - they should not be in too much trouble from ENG.

We'll just have to seen then. For me I wouldn't consider Anderson, Broad and Finn to be weak links neither would I consider all the batsmen bar the aforementioned. Cook/Colly could very well be but I don't see Trott as a weak link.

Similarly I'd see Hauritz and possibly Johnson as weaklinks.
 
Didn't Trott score 1,000 international runs this summer? He's got the perfect mentality for an Ashes series.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top