Team Of The Ashes Series

Ok, easy Monday morning stuff.

It was 3-0 but a composite team, may be quite equal?

Rogers
Root
Pietersen
Clarke
Bell
Smith
Haddin
Broad
Swann
Harris
Anderson

6-5 to England, although Siddle could replace Anderson.

Can't disagree with that. I also don't know how on earth Siddal could replace Anderson, given that the latter had a good first test and then was just OK

If we're having six batsman, then I'd put Trot - who did have a couple of half centuries ahead of Smith or even Watson or Warner

So Smith is my only question mark

Yeah Siddle like Jimmy faded a little, but Jimmy did at least some back to his best at the Oval. I thought Smith scored some runs when needed as well as that 138, plus is a handy 6th bowler.

Not sure what Clarke did to deserve a spot. One fine innings mixed with plenty of mediocre batting. Guess there's nobody else!

I felt that when really needed Smith wafted and got caught behind the wicket.

Overall the batsmen from both sides (Ian Bell excepted) were poor.

Fists of Fury wrote:Not sure what Clarke did to deserve a spot. One fine innings mixed with plenty of mediocre batting. Guess there's nobody else!

Indeed. Watson had one, but that was against a weakened attack. Trott was at least consistent to an extent. He could get a place.

Root, Watson, Clarke and Smith all had one good innings. normally that would not earn anyone a place in a composite side.

LondonTiger wrote:Root, Watson, Clarke and Smith all had one good innings. normally that would not earn anyone a place in a composite side.

Smith made a couple of fifties as well, in a low scoring series. Not to shoddy.

LondonTiger wrote:Root, Watson, Clarke and Smith all had one good innings. normally that would not earn anyone a place in a composite side.

Root had two good innings, was not out at Old Trafford (at the end) and was out going for gold on Sunday. For me he justifies his opener place in this 'best of'

Agree with Stella's team, interesting that it is about even given the scoreline.

But makes sense when you consider how much better than anyone else Bell was, and how far ahead Swann is of anything Australia could offer in the spin department.

Based on the BBCs rankings the team would be:

Rogers 8/10
Warner 6/10
Watson 6/10
Clarke 7/10
Bell 9.5/10
Smith 8/10
Haddin 7/10
Broad 8/10
Swan 8.5/10
Harris 8/10 (undermarked)
Anderson 8/10

So only 4 English. With Bresnan being ranked 5th best bowler, just goes to showe that bowlers win matches I guess.
Or some iffy marking

Think I would agree with Stella's side.
Don't think Trott has done anything to get in a head of Smith. Smith scored a 50 in the first game, then was among the wickets in the 2nd, scored an 89 in the 3rd game and then finished it off with a hundred in the final game. Trott on the other hand couldn't go beyond 59 even ones in the series despite getting quite a few starts.

Talk about a series which wasnt one for the Ages. The fact that Root is plausibly picked for the openers slot says it all... KP should be in the XI, played a few uber-vital cameos, and got himself a very important ton. So in my infinite wisdom... Here we go.
Rogers
Root
Trott
Pietersen
Clarke
Bell
Haddin (it was close)
Broad
Swann
Harris
Anderson.

So I have it 8-3, although Smith vs Trott (moving everyone one up to accomodate Smith) is a toss-up, and the Aussie pace bowlers could argue a case if they werent rotated

Rogers
Root
Trott
KP
Clarke (c)
Bell
Haddin (wk)
Swann
Siddle
Harris
Anderson

No Broad? Thought he was a shoe in?

I think it would be very odd not to include Broad! Also trott instead of KP is strange?

Cancel re kp! Misread post. ..