wuddie
Black by Demand
great win, incredible finish, i'd never have thought we can still win after day 2. i think now that aust is two nil up, jacque and watson will make into the side, replacing hayden and martyn, both of whom have been ordinary.
Ashes to Ashes (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter wuddie
- Start date
Fast_heinz
Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2004
- Messages
- 31
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2006
James Anderson - worst international test paceman since Mervyn Dillon and Tino Best...why couldn't Duncan Fletcher pick Saj Mahmood who, whilst inaccurate and unpredictable, clearly troubled Australia during the ICC Champions Trophy.
And the Wheelie Bin is sinking into the depths of Richard Dawson, Peter Such and Mahendra Nagamootoo spin bowling ignominy...test cricket is won with specialist players, not this bits and pieces crap...
...not that Monty Panesar probably would've made much of a difference, Ponting and Hussey both look bulletproof atm, its just that we may have been robbed of a real spectacle already because of Fletcher's pigheaded conservatism.
Thats taking nothing away from Australia, they well and truly deserved it.
And the Wheelie Bin is sinking into the depths of Richard Dawson, Peter Such and Mahendra Nagamootoo spin bowling ignominy...test cricket is won with specialist players, not this bits and pieces crap...
...not that Monty Panesar probably would've made much of a difference, Ponting and Hussey both look bulletproof atm, its just that we may have been robbed of a real spectacle already because of Fletcher's pigheaded conservatism.
Thats taking nothing away from Australia, they well and truly deserved it.
BlackDragon
Active Member
wuddie said:
timlay said:
we should not be experimenting with the side just because we're 2 - 0. it would be stupid to get rid of hayden and martyn and alter the fast bowler attack. what if we do and we lose the next test? from that position it won't take england much to draw the series and retain the urn. some changes maybe, but not changes like that.
Last edited:
That really was an historic match.
Unbelievable.
I woke up in the morning and turned on the telly expecting a boring and dull draw, then england shot themselves in the foot with stupid tactics, and warne applied the pressure and bam, sensational.
I don't know why England persist with Giles. On a pitch where warne was turning it a mile, and the footmarks were perfectly placed for an off spinner, Giles continued with his ridiculously full deliveries and crammed the on side with fielders. Seriously, it seems his tactic is "try not to be hit for boundaries".
Anderson was very unimpressive and loose.
And they really should give Harmison an extended spell. Taking him off in his 2nd or 3rd over the moment a couple of boundaries are scored off him is not going to help his confidence. It is pretty obvious that since the first day of the first test Australia have targeted him. If he is only going to get 6 overs per innings he is wasting a position in the side.
England seem to be choosing their bowlers on their abilities as tailend batsmen.
And get the fuck rid of Jones. He can't Bat and he can't Keep.
Australia are lucky to be able to choose their bowlers on their skill, and they all (besides McGrath) just happen to be handy batsmen.
Changes? At 2 - nil up you really can't make too many drastic changes, but i would eventually like to see Jacques replace Hayden. Hussey should be put up to number 4 dropping Martin and Clark down a spot, and Haddin should replace Gilchrist. Having said that, Jacques is only 28 so has many many more years left in him. But for the meantime the promotion of Hussey is the only really feasible change that could be made for the next test.
On another note, I think England's first innings proved that if McGrath is not firing, and i don't mean just with wickets, i mean through the presure he creates with his incredibly tight bowling, the rest of the australian attack are pretty helpless until it gets into the later stages of the game and warne has a pitch to his liking.
Those are my observations.
Thank you for your time.
Unbelievable.
I woke up in the morning and turned on the telly expecting a boring and dull draw, then england shot themselves in the foot with stupid tactics, and warne applied the pressure and bam, sensational.
I don't know why England persist with Giles. On a pitch where warne was turning it a mile, and the footmarks were perfectly placed for an off spinner, Giles continued with his ridiculously full deliveries and crammed the on side with fielders. Seriously, it seems his tactic is "try not to be hit for boundaries".
Anderson was very unimpressive and loose.
And they really should give Harmison an extended spell. Taking him off in his 2nd or 3rd over the moment a couple of boundaries are scored off him is not going to help his confidence. It is pretty obvious that since the first day of the first test Australia have targeted him. If he is only going to get 6 overs per innings he is wasting a position in the side.
England seem to be choosing their bowlers on their abilities as tailend batsmen.
And get the fuck rid of Jones. He can't Bat and he can't Keep.
Australia are lucky to be able to choose their bowlers on their skill, and they all (besides McGrath) just happen to be handy batsmen.
Changes? At 2 - nil up you really can't make too many drastic changes, but i would eventually like to see Jacques replace Hayden. Hussey should be put up to number 4 dropping Martin and Clark down a spot, and Haddin should replace Gilchrist. Having said that, Jacques is only 28 so has many many more years left in him. But for the meantime the promotion of Hussey is the only really feasible change that could be made for the next test.
On another note, I think England's first innings proved that if McGrath is not firing, and i don't mean just with wickets, i mean through the presure he creates with his incredibly tight bowling, the rest of the australian attack are pretty helpless until it gets into the later stages of the game and warne has a pitch to his liking.
Those are my observations.
Thank you for your time.
HotShot
-_-
You must be crazy to say that was 'one of the greatest matches of all time' - any match that Australia wins will not be 'one of the greatest matches of all time' - simply cos they are supposed to win every game considering their ranking how far ahead they are, the previous match.BlackDragon said:
On the other hand had England won - it would have defintely been 'one of the greatest matches of all time'.
I cant see england winning a single test match - their best chances maybe is at the SCG.
nothing like the Calcutta test - where India were forced to follow on - and then a huge partnership between Dravid and Laxman and they won the match - now that is 'one of the greatest Test matches' an unlikely victory that was unexpected.
If you saw Australia last defeat at Adelaide it was against India -it was similar to some extent - thus this result was harldy unexpected. It was just shit batting from England really.
HotShot
-_-
2 nil up - England shattered - the ideal time to bring in youth.
1Jacques
2Hussey
3Ponting
4Clarke
5 Lehmann
6Haddin
7Lee
8Clark
9Johsonn
10.Tait
11.Macgill
this team will easily beat England.
1Jacques
2Hussey
3Ponting
4Clarke
5 Lehmann
6Haddin
7Lee
8Clark
9Johsonn
10.Tait
11.Macgill
this team will easily beat England.
BlackDragon
Active Member
you dropped langer (a century and 91), hayden, martyn, mcgrath (5 for), warne (enough said), & gilchrist for haddin?!, jacques, LEHMAN?? TAIT??, macgill for warne? and johnsonn. you are taking the quality out of our side!HotShot said:
what if the fucking point changing the team for the sake of changing it? that is idiodic. we have a winning forumla and there is no point destabilising our team and the series for no reason. what if england win the match? we go back to the team that actually was winning? what is the point in changing the team then in the first place? i would not fucking rely on tait, lehmann and jacques to support our team and i very much think that england would have a MASSIVELY improved chance of winning the next test. god, this is stupid. 5 bowlers, 3 NEW bowlers, one less batsmen, reshuffling hussey for no reason when he is fantastic in the middle order, pushing clarke up for no reason, TAIT? WTF?, NO mcrgrath or warne. this team would NOT win. england are a GOOD side. second best in the world. just because we are 2 - 0 ahead it doesn't mean it is going to be a breeze from now it. it hasn't been a breeze so far. we won the first test because we were good (with the right side) but also because england were underdone. they massively improved in the 2nd test and were winning it for most of the time. only to lose due to a crap tactical last day and basically, a miracle day for australia of good cricket.
Last edited:
No, we cannot be complacent just because we're 2 up. This is just what happened in '81 and we lost that one (although argueably, that was more to do with that 2nd game)
I reckon keep the winning team until we have another win or 2 more draws under our belt.
If there are any changes at all, i reckon we should drop Martyn and play an extra bowler/batsman (or watson if he is fit). Martyn has had 4 innings to impress the selectors and hasn't really come through for us. I reckon for the WACA:
Hayden
Langer
Ponting (captain)
Hussey (proven to be an excellent partner to Ponting and Clarke)
Clarke
Gilchrist (vc)
Warne
Lee
Clark
McGrath
Johnson/Tait/MacGill, depending on what the pitch favours (I hear they're trying to prepare a traditional WACA pitch)
If watson is fit to play (i hear there are some serious doubts though), then put in above gilly at 6.
England really needs a day 5 wicket taker like Panesar. I also reckon Strauss should take the captaincy so Freddie can play his natural bowling/batting game:
Strauss (captain)
Cook
Bell
Pietersen (aggressive player between the stable Bell and the level headed Collingwood)
Collingwood
Flintoff (vc)
Jones
Hoggard
Harmison
Panesar
-If they are confident in their batting, go with Read as a wicket keeper over Jones.
I reckon keep the winning team until we have another win or 2 more draws under our belt.
If there are any changes at all, i reckon we should drop Martyn and play an extra bowler/batsman (or watson if he is fit). Martyn has had 4 innings to impress the selectors and hasn't really come through for us. I reckon for the WACA:
Hayden
Langer
Ponting (captain)
Hussey (proven to be an excellent partner to Ponting and Clarke)
Clarke
Gilchrist (vc)
Warne
Lee
Clark
McGrath
Johnson/Tait/MacGill, depending on what the pitch favours (I hear they're trying to prepare a traditional WACA pitch)
If watson is fit to play (i hear there are some serious doubts though), then put in above gilly at 6.
England really needs a day 5 wicket taker like Panesar. I also reckon Strauss should take the captaincy so Freddie can play his natural bowling/batting game:
Strauss (captain)
Cook
Bell
Pietersen (aggressive player between the stable Bell and the level headed Collingwood)
Collingwood
Flintoff (vc)
Jones
Hoggard
Harmison
Panesar
-If they are confident in their batting, go with Read as a wicket keeper over Jones.
Last edited:
They should pick Read anyway, Jones' batting isn't THAT much better at all. You pick a keeper to keep, and Read does that better. Ditto Panesar, Giles is shit.
If Jones batted heaps better (like at Gilly's level, when he's playing well), then it would be understandable.
If Jones batted heaps better (like at Gilly's level, when he's playing well), then it would be understandable.
BlackDragon
Active Member
yes i agree. the only change that should happen or could happen for aus is watson in for martyn. and i also agree, monty for giles. they need wickets.goony said:
davo_
good kid
I love how you say "ideal time to bring in the youth" and yet you mention Lehmann (and I assume I am not mistaken and you are referring to Darren Lehmann and not some young up and comer.) There is no way that side would ever get chosen - and frankly I don't think it would have a shot against the English side. Fair enough introducing youth and so on - but you do this when need be - ie if any of the current 'older players' are not performing. You can't get rid of Warne or McGrath; sure it would be good to blood some young players - but at the same time you can't make a mockery of an Australian selection: you've got to choose your best team. In agreeance with what others have said choosing a side this would totally disrupt the team. The only change likely to happen for the next match is likely to be the dropping of probably Martyn for Watson. I don't entirely agree with this - it seems the Australian selectors want an all rounder for the sake of having an all rounder regardless of how good he is (ie Australia has caught the Freddie Flintoff fever). It would be great to see Watson prove himself, but I don't believe he has yet.HotShot said:
runtlocks
the diff'rence
LOL!timlay said:
I agree with the Read/Jones debate, Read should definitly be in there. The English by this moment are probably hounding for Fletcher's blood.
wuddie
Black by Demand
i wouldnt bring in any risky or young players into the side until the aussies have actually won the ashes (ie 3 nil). in the case of martyn and hayden, i think they deserve one last shot at it because calling for the axe.
macgill is not having too much luck with the selectors, so i doubt he'll play in perth, unless they think the pitch is really gonna turn, then we can afford the luxury of sitting out mcgrath.
macgill is not having too much luck with the selectors, so i doubt he'll play in perth, unless they think the pitch is really gonna turn, then we can afford the luxury of sitting out mcgrath.
BlackDragon
Active Member
they say watson is not going to be fit.
so its pretty likely it'll be the same side for the perth test as the previous two. they also say the wicket is likely to be slow like adelaide was, so it is very important that we win the toss and bat first.
so its pretty likely it'll be the same side for the perth test as the previous two. they also say the wicket is likely to be slow like adelaide was, so it is very important that we win the toss and bat first.
BlackDragon
Active Member
the issue with playing them both is that their batting could be weakened, as i have heard they are not as good. but giles and jones have not been performing in either of their duties and i've heard reid can be alright so i'd not be very opposed to playing them both. i think it would breathe life into the english side a bit.
god forbid they keep both jones and giles. they should swap both, or atleast put in monty for the piece of crap giles.
god forbid they keep both jones and giles. they should swap both, or atleast put in monty for the piece of crap giles.
Last edited:
T
Testpilot
Guest
England must do something to win the series. In Adelaide they were playing to draw (i.e. not to lose), when they need to be playing to win. The English selectors backed the same team (from the Brisbane test) in Adelaide and it resulted in a very embarassing defeat. They must make changes. Giles has done nothing, so put Monty in. Also neither of the openers have done anything great. If England wants the Ashes back they need to win at least 2 tests.
At the moment, as an Aussie, I couldn't be happier. Although Martyn needs to find some form.
EDIT:BlackDragon, I love your sig.
At the moment, as an Aussie, I couldn't be happier. Although Martyn needs to find some form.
EDIT:BlackDragon, I love your sig.
runtlocks
the diff'rence
All good and true, but we want a competitive series. Although to be fair, all hopes and dreams of retaining the ashes are dashed for England.