England v Australia

First topic message reminder :

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?

Excellent partnership. Just need to keep run rate below six for several more overs and then finish off with a few hefty blows....

Most annoying thing is we probably would have won 5-0 but for the weather. Anyway, played ten and won ten ODIs this year.

Great innings from Ravi here, hope he stays in to the end.

They have picked it up well at the end here. They seem to have got it sorted these two at the mo.

I am really surprised. Really thought the three spinners would have taken this already.

trebellbobaggins wrote:They have picked it up well at the end here.....

A rare burst of optimism from Trebs

Cool gone, starting to lose spare balls again and annoyingly gone before the powerplay overs.

It's still a match this. Not over.

Corporalhumblebucket wrote:

trebellbobaggins wrote:They have picked it up well at the end here.....

A rare burst of optimism from Trebs

His optimism probably caused the third wicket to fall!

I turned the telly back on,

Kiss of death every time.

And nick knight is still on, painful.

They are singing the Mitchell Johnson song even without him there.

Well that's the then, blimey, they seem to be pulling it out in all sorts of ways here. Impressive.

Aussie keep one in the world but they are not way out in front as they once were.

gotta feel abit for mogs really-- done well this series- but bop has allways had the chance before him and with that will take the test place.

all the same well done bops- man of the series

For the Tests, I hope we put Prior at 6 and have both Bresnan and Finn in the team. Bopara's had his chance I feel at Test level and I wouldn't want Bairstow, a rookie, against Steyn, Morkel and Philander.

Duty281 wrote:For the Tests, I hope we put Prior at 6 and have both Bresnan and Finn in the team. Bopara's had his chance I feel at Test level and I wouldn't want Bairstow, a rookie, against Steyn, Morkel and Philander.

I think that's very unfair on Bopara considering he's scored runs in both the county championship and this one day series, and I don't see how failing in four tests (after succeeding in the three previous ones) means he's had his chance in Tests.

We cant play bairstow agianst the best oponent we can possibly face,,,

happy with bops- he is an allrounder and in top form.. form is very important to me, formats not so- at least he has done it before at test level. i think it could be time to say bye to bres and play finn instead.

then we have a stronger bowling and batting line up in my opinion

the options are 2 from these below.. the rest pick themselves.

mogs
bairstow
bops
bres
finn


surely bops and finn are the best option at present

Bopara at 6 and Finn as the 3rd seamer IMO. Though I wouldnt mind Onions as the 3rd seamer either.

so england are on 118 pts with SA and Aus are on 119..

as long as england win the tests v SA we will have a chance in the first odi to become no.1 in all formats

Weakening the batting just to get Finn in the team makes no sense. Batting is probably England's weakest facet, Bresnan is not a Test number 7 and the bowling does not need strengthening.

Finn for Bresnan does make sense though.

how is bringing in bop and finn for bairstow and bres weakening the batting- lol

its strengthing both batting and bowling based on recent form..

yes in an ideal world the former option is great.. but we also need abit more bowling stamina for my money..

i look at bres as a bowler anyway- finn is better

bop is a batsman in form that can bowl very well(perfect all rounder really)- batting much better than bairstow at the minute

shankythebiggestengfan wrote:Finn for Bresnan does make sense though.

No it doesn't. Bresnan is the man in possesion and his ability to produce reverse swing from the old ball is a vital asset to England. Also, he has excellent control which England management demand and was the reason for Finn being dropped durng the Ashes. Plus he can bat which is a bonus.

mystiroakey wrote:how is bringing in bop and finn for bairstow and bres weakening the batting- lol

its strengthing both batting and bowling based on recent form..

yes in an ideal world the former option is great.. but we also need abit more bowling stamina for my money..

i look at bres as a bowler anyway- finn is better

bop is a batsman in form that can bowl very well(perfect all rounder really)- batting much better than bairstow at the minute

I was referring to the post that said move Prior to 6 meaning Bresnan at 7. That is weakening the batting.

That's fine that you think Finn is better, that's not really the point. It's not about the best 11 individuals, it's about getting the right mix and therefore best team. England have that with their current setup. It'd be crazy to change that.

liverbenz players move on, The england players in the background are improving every day- that is why every time they come into play they play brilliantly- there is progression behind the scenes. The ashes was a long time ago

Tremlett likely to be playing in Surrey's four day game. He could also come back into the reckoning, tho' not just yet.

If anyone had suggested putting Bopara in ahead of Bairstow 3 months ago they wouldve been burnt at the stake.

we need to pick our 4 best bowlers(immaterial of batting) IF we bring bop in- because he is the perfect all round option..

so its really just a question of who those 4 best are- i have to go with finn over bres!

simples really- we still have 7 batsman, broad and swann!! that is long..

Our attack strangles teams big time as well. they win game after game after game- in all formats. batting has become redundant so many times- with players like cook,trott,bell and kp in the side- jeas thats not even weak- that is world class

I'm not sure what you're getting at there. Is Bresnan retiring soon or something?The Ashes waa 18 months ago. Since then England have gone to number 1 in the world with the current bowling unit. It's working. Bresnan has been the most consistent of the four arguably and has better figures than any of them.

Frankly I think it's a moot debate as injuries aside, the bowling unit will be the same as the 2nd Test vs WI with Bopara's recent performances likely getting him another shout at number 6.

liver we look better at odi than test at the minute. we had a shocker v pakistain, there is an issue position (the bairstow,mogs one).. if we go for bop we can then go for our 4 top bowlers, rather than ones that can bat,

If bres is still in our top 4 then no dramas- but we need competition for places as well as a stable backbone.. the no.6 position is still bringing up selection dilemas

Corporalhumblebucket wrote:Tremlett likely to be playing in Surrey's four day game. He could also come back into the reckoning, tho' not just yet.

Given his age and injury record, it wouldn't surprise me if we'd seen the last of Chris Tremlett in an England shirt.

i think the fact he played today tells us that he is still in with a shout.

i doubt the selectors were just given him a run for a hell of it

mystiroakey wrote:liver we look better at odi than test at the minute. we had a shocker v pakistain, there is an issue position (the bairstow,mogs one).. if we go for bop we can then go for our 4 top bowlers, rather than ones that can bat,

If bres is still in our top 4 then no dramas- but we need competition for places as well as a stable backbone.. the no.6 position is still bringing up selection dilemas

I don't think Bresnan's position in the team is in anyway related to who bats at 6. He's in the team for his bowling. His batting is an added bonus though.

Finn will get his chance though. Broad, Anderson and Bresnan have had their fair share of injuries in the last 18 months and he and Onions are probably next in line.

mystiroakey wrote:i think the fact he played today tells us that he is still in with a shout.

i doubt the selectors were just given him a run for a hell of it

?

??


bresnan was allways behind finn, if finn is showing that potential again then dont be suprised if he gets picked on merit over bres

tremlett- for some reason i thought treadwell was mentioned.. i am getting tired lol

mystiroakey wrote:??


bresnan was allways behind finn, if finn is showing that potential again then dont be suprised if he gets picked on merit over bres

I'll be stunned if Bresnan is not in the 11 for the 1st Test. He's been England's most consistent performer these last 18 months. It would send the wrong message to drop him now.

Anyway, you're right! It's late, I'm tired too! Night!!

liverbnz wrote:

shankythebiggestengfan wrote:Finn for Bresnan does make sense though.

No it doesn't. Bresnan is the man in possesion and his ability to produce reverse swing from the old ball is a vital asset to England. Also, he has excellent control which England management demand and was the reason for Finn being dropped durng the Ashes. Plus he can bat which is a bonus.

I can understand people wanting Bresnan in the team but to say that picking Finn over him doesnt make any sense is rather silly. Both have got their own advantages.

What have England had no problems with in any formats recently?
Bowling

What have England lost or struggled in games recently because of?
Batting

Bresnans bowling is part of a fully functional test unit, it certainly isnt an issue that needs fixing, nor is the teams bowling.
The teams batting however is shaky. Why weaken it further to try and fix a problem that doesnt exist?
We are talking about a guy who averages 26 with the ball and 40 with the bat here.


Bopara for Bairstow makes more sense. Hes in form at the moment and Bairstow has been a failure so far. It may strengthen the batting. Adding the extra bowling option is an added bonus, especially in a damp summer where the odd medium pace wobbler may cause problems. But ...its Ravi Bopara FFS

shankythebiggestengfan wrote:

liverbnz wrote:

shankythebiggestengfan wrote:Finn for Bresnan does make sense though.

No it doesn't. Bresnan is the man in possesion and his ability to produce reverse swing from the old ball is a vital asset to England. Also, he has excellent control which England management demand and was the reason for Finn being dropped durng the Ashes. Plus he can bat which is a bonus.

I can understand people wanting Bresnan in the team but to say that picking Finn over him doesnt make any sense is rather silly. Both have got their own advantages.

It doesn't make sense though. Why would you drop the bowler who has been your top performer the last 18 months?

Duty281 wrote:Steven Finn has to play in the first Test against the Saffers, he looks unplayable here.

He has made himself into a very good one-day bowler, and will be a top draw first reserve against SA. But Bresnan has justified his selection. He has demonstrated an aptitude for working out batsmen, which is critical in a tight Test series. He is also a different bowler from Broad, to whom Finn is quite similar, and to Anderson, to whom Onions is quite similar. His stats are sensationally good (better than Flintoff and even Beefy) and that is no fluke in my view. So Bresnan plays, but we have a great pool of reserves behind him.

msp83 wrote:James Tredwell has done well stepping in for Swanny. He even managed to produce that usual first over wicket!!.

Tredwell is Swann without any hair or one-liners. A good understudy to have, and has probably got himself ahead of Samit as the one spinner to play if Swann's not available.

msp83 wrote:This Australia ODI side seriously looks short of real class. Neither the batting nor the bowling units are working in order. Although there is class in the bowling unit including James Pattinson and when fit Pat Cummins, Hilfenhaus hasn't quite mastered the OD game, Lee is approaching the end of his career and they don't have a real quality spinner.
The batting, as has been exposed by England brutally, is too dependent on Watson, Warner and Clarke. One of them, David Warner is still finding the range of the challenge that international cricket is.

The bowling has potential, though I agree that Hilfenhaus and I would also say Pattinson aren't ideally suited to limited overs games. Lee could have a couple of years left in him though, whilst Cummins has great potential in all forms of the game and McKay is a good one-day bowler. Ryan Harris is also good in ODIs, but I think they keep him for Tests because of his dreadful injury record.

The batting is where Australia still have real problems. They just don't have a cohesive plan - why, for instance, does Bailey, their leading runscorer, start the series at 3 and finish at 7? Why does Clarke not bat at 3? and many other issues. Warner and Watson can both be very successful in ODIs at the top of the order. Both are century-makers, and Warner has shown that he can play an orthodox innings as well as a powerful one. But after that they seem clueless, chopping and changing every game.

I support the perception that this Aussie team struggles with swing. We've seen that in this series, and also the last Ashes, and most noticeably in South Africa when they were 21-9. They need to work on this weakness fast, or could find themselves in trouble again in upcoming series.

----

Overall, superb from England. When Trott got out last night, I did think we might mess this one up, but the Essex boys came good again. I think both teams struggled to adapt their batting to the 32-over format initially - neither can you use your normal ODI plans, nor is it short enough to go into T20 mode.

The catching is an issue which needs to be sorted. We shelled a few against WI, and today was very bad. Patel is an ordinary fielder, but at any level you must take those. Meanwhile, Anderson generally just doesn't drop those in the slips.

Anyway, attention now turns to the massive series against South Africa. Bring it on!

Shelsey93 wrote: Warner and Watson can both be very successful in ODIs at the top of the order. Both are century-makers, and Warner has shown that he can play an orthodox innings as well as a powerful one. But after that they seem clueless, chopping and changing every game.

I suspect Watson may be moved down the order for Aus. Arthur seems to think being a front line bowler and opening the batting is too much to ask from him and I'd say he's probably right.

to bresnans credit he has performed best v aus and india(under 20 average, yet not that great v bangladeshWI or sri lanka(over 33 ave)

in england since bres played for england(2 years ago)

he averages 25
broad averages 24
anderson ave 25

its all the same- all have performed the same in england since bres played his first test.

"His stats are sensationally good (better than Flintoff and even Beefy) and that is no fluke in my view. So Bresnan plays, but we have a great pool of reserves behind him."

io am sorry but if you think he is gonna maintain that 40 ave at batting then your dreaming

Id bet a more natural ave with the bat is around 20-30 mark like his odi is- he hasnt played enough tests yet to warrant a realistic batting ave.

Id love to be proved wrong mind, and he has a top bowiling ave- which we have to say is worthy because he is picked as a bowler

mystiroakey wrote:"His stats are sensationally good (better than Flintoff and even Beefy) and that is no fluke in my view. So Bresnan plays, but we have a great pool of reserves behind him."

io am sorry but if you think he is gonna maintain that 40 ave at batting then your dreaming

Id bet a more natural ave with the bat is around 20-30 mark like his odi is- he hasnt played enough tests yet to warrant a realistic batting ave.

Id love to be proved wrong mind, and he has a top bowiling ave- which we have to say is worthy because he is picked as a bowler

I think he can average in the 30s and make tons as a batsman. As a bowler the average will probably go up slightly, but he's bowled well enough that to get it to where it is is not a fluke.

bres is in a top side so his chances at getting NO's are gonna be good but i doubt we will see him ave in the 30's come carrer end even still

Shelsey93 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Steven Finn has to play in the first Test against the Saffers, he looks unplayable here.

He has made himself into a very good one-day bowler, and will be a top draw first reserve against SA. But Bresnan has justified his selection. He has demonstrated an aptitude for working out batsmen, which is critical in a tight Test series. He is also a different bowler from Broad, to whom Finn is quite similar, and to Anderson, to whom Onions is quite similar. His stats are sensationally good (better than Flintoff and even Beefy) and that is no fluke in my view. So Bresnan plays, but we have a great pool of reserves behind him.

Thats your opinion. IMO Finn is a much better bowler and should play.

Steve Finn series top wicket taker

shankythebiggestengfan wrote:Thats your opinion. IMO Finn is a much better bowler and should play.

While looking at Finn and Bresnan subjectively, Finn definitely looks like the bowler who would cause more problems at Test level. However, Bres has perhaps over-achieved so far in his test career - he may look like an honest county trundler, but his Test bowling average of 25 (and being part of a winning team each time the weather has permitted a result) suggests that he is way more effective than first impressions indicate. Add to that the fact that Bres adds to the lower middle order batting strength (7-10 of Prior, Bres, Broad and Swann is exceptionally strong) while Finn is a pure bowler, and the case for continuing to include Bresnan is strong.

Overall, it's a far better dilemma to have than most of us were used to in the 90s and early 00s. Compare this with selection meetings discussing whether to include Jimmy Ormond again

So very true, that last para in particular.

What i love is that every time another bolwer come sin they look awesome. Its to random as an england fan to have this depth of talent. And great that the competition for places is actually produceing results