England v Australia

Any thoughts on the ODI series starting a week today? How will the teams line up - in particular, will Australia follow England's lead & field 5 "proper" bowlers? If Morgan excels, can he force his way back into the test side?

I have to say, given the amount of ODIs these two sides seem to have played recently and will be playing, this series seems a bit silly.

On the plus side, Australia will be playing Ireland, and seem quite keen to help out the associate countries (closer to home they've done some great work in PNG).

In any case Australia won't be playing 5 out and out bowlers because unlike England they have a genuine all-rounder (in ODIs) in Shane Watson. There are a few question marks around what is the strongest Australian side: personally I quite like Wade at the top of the order - not sure he's got the skills to bat in the middle, so Watson at 3 seems the right way to go. Bailey and Forrest are pretty much fighting for the no 5 slot, then you've got Hussey (D) and Smith will be looking to take his good IPL form with him. I like him, and hope he does well. In the bowling department McKay has done well recently, and Doherty is the preferred spinner. The other 2 spots are open, you would think Lee and...?

England's team is actually much more settled in comparison, with the only real question being whether you go for the extra seamer in Bresnan or another spin option in Patel.

Mike Selig

Some interesting points there:

1) Watson has a fantastic record as an opener, but an awful one as a first drop - can Australia really afford to ignore that?

2) Are England really that settled? Kieswetter doesn't strike me as a number six & Bopara continues to look mediocre - that makes for a pretty soft middle order.

Australia will probably play Wade (wk), Warner, Watson, Clarke (c), D. Hussey, Bailey, Smith, Doherty and three of Johnson, Hilfenhaus, Cummins, McKay and Pattinson.

England start favourites. They have a better top-order,a more reliable bowling attack and a better spinner. But Australia perhaps have better finishers (D. Hussey, though M. Hussey will be missed) and their bowling attack is far from bad.

They have, however, been a little inconsistent in their ODI planning - during the CB Series and tour of West Indies Wade went up and down the order like a yo-yo. It should also be noted that they tend to rotate their seamers (rather than rest them like we do). It would be a surprise if all five didn't feature at some point.

Personally I don't like the scheduling of this series. Another Test against SA would be far more valuable - that is the showpiece event of the summer and deserves 4 Tests. I like ODIs, but feel that we're overkilling on the Aussies - we played 5 vs them in 2009, 5 in 2010, 7 in 2010/11, will play 5 now, another 5 in 2013, a tri-series featuring both of us in 2013/14, we are also in the 2014/15 tri-series and Aus are back here in 2015. Ridiculous.

amanuensis wrote:Mike Selig

Some interesting points there:

1) Watson has a fantastic record as an opener, but an awful one as a first drop - can Australia really afford to ignore that?

2) Are England really that settled? Kieswetter doesn't strike me as a number six & Bopara continues to look mediocre - that makes for a pretty soft middle order.

I personally believe that they need Watson to open with Warner. A little more solid than Wade.

Kieswetter did his job the one time he was needed v WI, whilst two of Bopara's last 4 ODI series (and he only got 1 proper knock in this one) went brilliant. I think we look very settled.

amanuensis wrote:
1) Watson has a fantastic record as an opener, but an awful one as a first drop - can Australia really afford to ignore that?

How much has he actually batted at 3 though? The point may be reasonable, but I don't see who else could conceivably bat 3.

amanuensis wrote:
2) Are England really that settled? Kieswetter doesn't strike me as a number six & Bopara continues to look mediocre - that makes for a pretty soft middle order.

Bopara's done quite well in his latest stint (going back to the home series against India). Kieswetter is untested at 6, I'm not convinced he's adaptable enough to play there.

Shelsey93 wrote:
England start favourites. They have a better top-order,a more reliable bowling attack and a better spinner. But Australia perhaps have better finishers (D. Hussey, though M. Hussey will be missed) and their bowling attack is far from bad.

I think people are overrating England somewhat. I'm not sure at all they have the better top order: Watson is the best batsman involved in the series (M. Hussey not being around), and Warner and Wade have shown a lot of promise. Bell has had 2 innings against the weakest bowling attack in world cricket, OK he's done well but he is untested in this format at this level so far; Cook has done well, but I still feel Trott is too one-paced.

England certainly have the massive advantage in the spin department, but fast bowling is fairly even I'd have said (England maybe with a slight edge due to home conditions, but even then I'm not sure).

I think it should be close.

Mike Selig wrote:

Shelsey93 wrote:
England start favourites. They have a better top-order,a more reliable bowling attack and a better spinner. But Australia perhaps have better finishers (D. Hussey, though M. Hussey will be missed) and their bowling attack is far from bad.

I think people are overrating England somewhat. I'm not sure at all they have the better top order: Watson is the best batsman involved in the series (M. Hussey not being around), and Warner and Wade have shown a lot of promise. Bell has had 2 innings against the weakest bowling attack in world cricket, OK he's done well but he is untested in this format at this level so far; Cook has done well, but I still feel Trott is too one-paced.

England certainly have the massive advantage in the spin department, but fast bowling is fairly even I'd have said (England maybe with a slight edge due to home conditions, but even then I'm not sure).

I think it should be close.

Can't agree with that. Watson good, but Cook and Clarke better. Wade looks scratchy to me - when he comes off he comes off well but could easily be worked out bigtime by Anderson and co. Don't think that getting off to a quick start (as in 6+ an over) is as important as it used to be. Because of 1. T20 making batsmen more adept at scoring quickly at the end 2. Batting powerplays aiding that 3. Two new balls.

Shelsey93

"brilliantly"? I think you're being rather over the top there! He looks a pretty mediocre number four to me. As for Cook v Watson, sorry, but that's not really a contest - Watson has a fantastic record as an opener in this format.

Shelsey93 wrote:

Can't agree with that. Watson good, but Cook and Clarke better.

We're going to have to severely disagree. For me, Watson is the best ODI opener around (Sachin excluded), and the stats back this up. Clarke can get stuck occasionally; Cook is for the moment a long way behind Watson as ODI opener (Amla, possibly Shewag also ahead of him) and isn't even England's best player (that would be Morgan). Put it this way, who would you rather have to bowl at?

Shelsey93 wrote:Wade looks scratchy to me - when he comes off he comes off well but could easily be worked out bigtime by Anderson and co. Don't think that getting off to a quick start (as in 6+ an over) is as important as it used to be. Because of 1. T20 making batsmen more adept at scoring quickly at the end 2. Batting powerplays aiding that 3. Two new balls.

You may well be right. A couple of things though: Wade scratched a lot in the West Indies in the tests, but when he plays his natural game (as he did whilst scoring his century) he looks a lot better; you are right re getting off to a quick start, but for me Trott's problem is not that he doesn't get off to a quick start, it's that he can't accelerate at any stage. The ODI against Ireland was a case in point.

amanuensis wrote:Any thoughts on the ODI series starting a week today? How will the teams line up - in particular, will Australia follow England's lead & field 5 "proper" bowlers? If Morgan excels, can he force his way back into the test side?

Hopefully the rain continues for all these ODI matches V Australia so that none of their dangerous young players, particularly the likes of Pattinson and Cummins get sufficient match practice V England's players before next year's ashes test series.

Sadly tomorrow's game between Ireland and Australia looks set to fall foul to the weather. The umpires will inspect at 6am tomorrow, but the Twitter feed says "not looking good", with a picture posted featuring quite large puddles on the Stormont outfield. To make matters worse, even if the ground did by some miracle dry up in time for a shortened game the forecast is again terrible.

A real shame if this is called off, as the atmosphere at these games is always great, with tickets sold out well in advance, and it is Ireland's showpiece match of the year. Last year's encounter with England was also rain effected, though just about enough cricket was possible to get a result on that occasion.

Shelsey93 wrote:

Mike Selig wrote:

Shelsey93 wrote:
England start favourites. They have a better top-order,a more reliable bowling attack and a better spinner. But Australia perhaps have better finishers (D. Hussey, though M. Hussey will be missed) and their bowling attack is far from bad.

I think people are overrating England somewhat. I'm not sure at all they have the better top order: Watson is the best batsman involved in the series (M. Hussey not being around), and Warner and Wade have shown a lot of promise. Bell has had 2 innings against the weakest bowling attack in world cricket, OK he's done well but he is untested in this format at this level so far; Cook has done well, but I still feel Trott is too one-paced.

England certainly have the massive advantage in the spin department, but fast bowling is fairly even I'd have said (England maybe with a slight edge due to home conditions, but even then I'm not sure).

I think it should be close.

Can't agree with that. Watson good, but Cook and Clarke better. Wade looks scratchy to me - when he comes off he comes off well but could easily be worked out bigtime by Anderson and co. Don't think that getting off to a quick start (as in 6+ an over) is as important as it used to be. Because of 1. T20 making batsmen more adept at scoring quickly at the end 2. Batting powerplays aiding that 3. Two new balls.

We are talking about ODIs here. Watson is the best ODI opener in the world, if you exclude Sachin who doesnt play much ODI cricket these days. Cook has had a good year but Watson has won Australia lots of matches including the Champions Trophy 2009 Semis and Finals on his own. To suggest that Cook and Clarke are better ODI batsmen is incredibly laughable to say the least.

Australia have a far better batting line up than England. For the starters, they dont have a tail that starts at 6.

shankythebiggestengfan wrote:Australia have a far better batting line up than England. For the starters, they dont have a tail that starts at 6.

But Englands "tail" consists of players who can bat down to 10



Youd be hard pressed to argue that Aus arent the stronger side though, especially with Pietersen gone. England have had a good ODI record over the last couple of years I( india tour aside) but Aus are far and away the strongest team in this format. Home conditions may even things a bit but I can hardly see Aus being intimidated by England.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

shankythebiggestengfan wrote:Australia have a far better batting line up than England. For the starters, they dont have a tail that starts at 6.

But Englands "tail" consists of players who can bat down to 10



Youd be hard pressed to argue that Aus arent the stronger side though, especially with Pietersen gone. England have had a good ODI record over the last couple of years I( india tour aside) but Aus are far and away the strongest team in this format. Home conditions may even things a bit but I can hardly see Aus being intimidated by England.

Err... we have Finn at 10. And Broad and Swann have awful ODI batting records.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

shankythebiggestengfan wrote:Australia have a far better batting line up than England. For the starters, they dont have a tail that starts at 6.

But Englands "tail" consists of players who can bat down to 10



Youd be hard pressed to argue that Aus arent the stronger side though, especially with Pietersen gone. England have had a good ODI record over the last couple of years I( india tour aside) but Aus are far and away the strongest team in this format. Home conditions may even things a bit but I can hardly see Aus being intimidated by England.

England's tail consists of players yes who can bat down to 10 but they are very vulnerable to fast bowling as was shown during the recent England V West Indies test series.

I would say the series is too close to call. In the very recent past Australia haven't been that convincing in ODIs, sure they've generally won series, but not all that easily. They are a more workmanlike side than when in their pomp. There are slight question marks about their number 5 slot in the absence of Hussey also.

England are at home, and seem at last to have developped a coherent gameplan for one-day games. They also have a clear edge in the spin department.

in an update on this, Shane Warne thinks England are bordering on arrogance

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/international/england/9357417/Shane-Warne-Englands-over-confidence-is-bordering-on-arrogance-and-I-believe-Australia-will-win-one-day-series.html

pretty ironic coming from him

killer938 wrote:in an update on this, Shane Warne thinks England are bordering on arrogance

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/international/england/9357417/Shane-Warne-Englands-over-confidence-is-bordering-on-arrogance-and-I-believe-Australia-will-win-one-day-series.html

pretty ironic coming from him

And no surprise to see him bigging up KP

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/stats/index.html?batting_positionmax1=2;batting_positionmin1=1;batting_positionval1=batting_position;class=2;filter=advanced;orderby=runs;spanmax1=27+Jun+2012;spanmin1=27+Apr+2011;spanval1=span;team=1;team=2;template=results;type=batting

You right there killer! To be accused of arrogance by an Austrailian crickterer is probably one of the highest forms of irony imaginable.

Of course it wasn't arrongance when Glenn McGrath predicted 5-0 whitewashes nearly every time the 2 teams met, just a sign of confidence.

Shane is wrong (largely) about any arrogance within the England team.

I think what he is getting at, though not explicitly, is the way the English media view Australian players. Some of our commentators and writers seem to be judging some of the more experienced Australian bowlers - Hilfenhaus, McKay, Harris, Siddle (I know the last two aren't on this trip) - entirely on the 2010/11 Ashes. In fact Australia have had a good attack either side of that series, and now have some youngsters to add to the group.

In one-day cricket Australia have seam bowling depth to match England. Lee, Hilfenhaus, Cummins, Pattinson, McKay, Harris, Siddle, Johnson, Starc. And that is before you consider Doug Bollinger or Shaun Tait. However, they have struggled to apply good plans at the depth, and haven't really solved the spin conundrum - Doherty is adequate in one-dayers but no better.

In the batting department Australia have plenty of match-winners. Warner and Watson at the top, Michael Clarke, David Hussey in the 'finisher' role and Mike Hussey too when he's available. But my personal belief is that they are a couple of batters light in this series. M. Hussey will be a big loss, and it is hard to tell how good Forrest and Bailey are at this stage. Wade has ability, but needs to deliver consistently.

My prediction is for an England series win. But it shouldn't be that comfortable, and I see some much needed close games.

by the way shelsey, Shaun Tait only plays t20 now

however agree with most of that post.

We'll win the series 4-1, home advantage and good bowling will see to that.

It's not Germany - Greece, Duty.

It will probably be a lot closer I'd say. England have improved a little in the last 18 months or so and Australia have a pretty competitive side even with Mike Hussey and Punter out.

I usually don't take Watto (nor Warnie - his live match comments, yes; pre-match wind-ups, no) too seriously but his recent comment about the balance of the team line ups, strengths and weaknesses was fairly obvious and a typical throw away statement.
It's rude, disrespectful, tiring and annoying for me too! So bloody predictable.

However, it's true they'll want to expose England's tail as quickly as possible and we have a much better seam bowling capability now with Cummins and Pattinson back from their injuries and Hilfenhaus a much improved bowler too. Sure, no spin wizard but Doherty can hold his own under pressure and thrives on a challenge.

England are rightly slight favourites at home and there's a chance for somebody to step up and lead the way. KP is a big loss but surely there is enough depth and experience there - it will come down to performance and confidence on the day.... whoever wants it most, etc.

I'm like most people on here. Although it's a nice treat to see another classic contest between England and Australia... it's a little strange to watch our guys play in summer in England between the 2 Test series... and no Ashes. I'll still take it though, thank you very much.

It feels sort of different from an Oz perspective but anything to help your lads prepare for SA.
Looking forward to that too. It will be interesting to see how both teams shape up.

Best of luck and enjoy the 5 matches.

Xavier Doherty is massively underrated in the shorter form of the game, limited overs specalist you would say, who bowls in the right areas..

ONLY IN LIMITED OVERS CRICKET.

CF wrote:Xavier Doherty is massively underrated in the shorter form of the game, limited overs specalist you would say, who bowls in the right areas..

ONLY IN LIMITED OVERS CRICKET.

He is a good limited overs bowler. Devastating in English conditions? Shouldn't be. Better than Swann? No

That's what we're there for isn't it CF?

Yeah, he's a sort of left-handed version of Johan Botha... good stock ball, safe pair of hands... shows plenty of energy, etc.
He's at the peak of his career right now and has had a couple of good domestic seasons here featuring in some big wins for Tassie.

Anyone know what the weather is expected to be like in London tomorrow?
Is there likely to be thunderstorms and rain? Or is it nice and hot now?

Linebreaker wrote:Anyone know what the weather is expected to be like in London tomorrow?
Is there likely to be thunderstorms and rain? Or is it nice and hot now?

Should be OK (fingers crossed). BBC suggesting it will be mostly cloudy.

Shelsey93 wrote:

CF wrote:Xavier Doherty is massively underrated in the shorter form of the game, limited overs specalist you would say, who bowls in the right areas..

ONLY IN LIMITED OVERS CRICKET.

He is a good limited overs bowler. Devastating in English conditions? Shouldn't be. Better than Swann? No

On current form, thats debatable. And Australia play spin better than us. We struggled against Doherty in Australia in Post Ashes and Pre-WC 2010/11 ODI series in Oz. It wouldnt come as a shock if Doherty has a better series than Swann.

Brett Lee will be dangerous as always, still bowls 90mph+ with relative ease, and should test the likes of bairstow etc..

The one thing I'm looking forward to is to seeing some seriously fast bowlers playing! Finn, Lee and Cummins are three very different bowlers, but all three can wang it down at 90mph plus and that always makes great viewing! I would much rather see a fourth Test match between England and SA than this series, but there are going to be superb cricketers on show and the battle of the pacemen is the one I am most looking forward to!

England-2-----Aus-1 ---- 2 rained off.

skyeman wrote:England-2-----Aus-1 ---- 2 rained off.

Absolutely brilliant post.

Well, not really but still bl**dy good to have you back, Skye.

Glad to be back .Missed this banter--

Hi Skye. Good to see you again.

When does it 'kick off'? 10:45am?

Is anyone else worried that england will do their normal slow start, it will rain and then due to Duckworth lewis australia will get a ridiculously low target.

Morning all. I see the Aussies have brought a mean looking young side.

Destroying the counties on their way to playing Eng. Looks rather worrying for Eng.

Their new pace bowlers apparently rather expose something we are missing.. genuine pace.

Bit worried about this series.

Nice try trebs!

You shouldn't be too worried. You've got some form on the board, no?

I'd definitely make Aussie huge favourites though. They are just better at this form.

Slight favourites here but I agree with Junior Waugh... it went out a bit after Aus won the toss.

We're struggling at the moment. Cook and Bell look set to stay around for a while yet.

Australia won the toss and bowled... not taking a wicket in the first 10 must therefore naturally be a concern. Having said that Australia had the better of that powerplay, even if that last over brought the score to the 40-ish that England would have been looking for.

ermmmmm. lowish RR guys

Pretty low indeed. What is par in these conditions at lords though? 240?

Aussie ahead for sure at the mo.

With their world class odi batting they probably fancy anything under 280.

RRs picking up now, good platform to make 260 plus

DL could screw them with the slow build though if theres many more interuptions

keystone cops fielding there... we're in fine touch!

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:DL could screw them with the slow build though if theres many more interuptions

That is true somewhat, although resources do come into play so wickets in hand will help us on the D/L. The forecast suggests we should be fine though, and as I speak it is brightening up here in Barnet - and so far we have had the same weather as Lord's, but about 20 minutes ahead.

The RR is not a major issue if we get a full game. With the current rules it is advantageous to keep wickets in hand. Going at 4.5-ish an over at the moment, 270 and beyond remain a possibility.