The Ashes: 5th Test, Sydney

5th Test Sydney, January 4-8, 2017 (23:30 GMT Jan 3)

Australia:
Bancroft, Warner, Khawaja, Smith *, S Marsh, M Marsh, Paine †, Starc, Cummins, Lyon, Hazelwood

England:
Cook, Stoneman, Vince, Root *, Malan, Bairstow †, Ali, Curran, Broad, Crane, Anderson

Starc apparently had about 30 minutes practice yesterday off his full run up but they are still not sure whether he will be OK for Friday... some players suggesting he is ready to go. If not; then Jackson Bird might find conditions more suitable for him than the last Test... courtesy of the new SCG curator who replaced Tom Parker about 6 months ago.

Chris Woakes is going for a scan on his left side and is very unlikely to play the Sydney Test. Mason Crane will replace him while Tom Curran and Moeen Ali look set to retain their places.

http://www.espn.com/espn/now?nowId=21-0739994480043627724-4

So has Woakes been playing hurt as well as Moeen? He had a side strain on his left side all summer...

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Chris Woakes is going for a scan on his left side and is very unlikely to play the Sydney Test. Mason Crane will replace him while Tom Curran and Moeen Ali look set to retain their places.

http://www.espn.com/espn/now?nowId=21-0739994480043627724-4

So has Woakes been playing hurt as well as Moeen? He had a side strain on his left side all summer...

Well that ends any debate about whether Crane should play and whether Ali should be dropped it would seem. In any case, according to Joe Root after inspecting the pitch, said it was a spinners wicket and even if Woakes had of been fit it was unlikely they would have left Ali out.

Poor old Glenn Maxwell's woes are compounded by his axing from the Australian limited overs side. To compound his misery he's been replaced by Chris Lynn, mighty fine batsman, but he recently got axed by Queensland thus hadn't played any domestic cricket. Wouldn't be surprised if maxwell became a T20 specialist.

Hopelessly out of form off spinner, a toothless medium pacer, and a debut legspinner.
They had better hope Andersons work load over the series and in particular the last test doesnt catch up with him.

Spinners wicket or not its a pretty lacklustre bowling line up and a hell of a long tail.

Agreed Gooseberry but England are plum out of options right now. The mentality to have I prefer thinking like how people felt when Jimmy first burst on the scene. No doubt there was the call that he was toothless but he grew into the finest seamer England have ever produced. I recall Nathan Lyon being lambasted when he first broke into the Aussie team with people saying he was not a suitable replacement for Warne but now he is the best spinner in the world. My point isvnew talent has to be given time to grow and mature in test cricket. They all have to start somewhere. Not saying Crane and Curran will be greats but you never know until they are tried.

Gooseberry wrote:Hopelessly out of form off spinner, a toothless medium pacer, and a debut legspinner.
They had better hope Andersons work load over the series and in particular the last test doesnt catch up with him.  

Spinners wicket or not its a pretty lacklustre bowling line up and a hell of a long tail.  

True, but with the Woakes injury I don't really see what other options they have? You definitely can't go in with a four man attack of Broad, Anderson, Curran and Crane, because you'll kill Broad/Anderson - but then we really need to get Moeen out of the spotlight, but then you can't bat Curran at 7!!

Kind of fitting in a tour where nothing has gone right for England in terms of injury/off the field luck, there was one final kick in the teeth

CaledonianCraig wrote:Agreed Gooseberry but England are plum out of options right now. The mentality to have I prefer thinking like how people felt when Jimmy first burst on the scene. No doubt there was the call that he was toothless but he grew into the finest seamer England have ever produced. I recall Nathan Lyon being lambasted when he first broke into the Aussie team with people saying he was not a suitable replacement for Warne but now he is the best spinner in the world. My point isvnew talent has to be given time to grow and mature in test cricket. They all have to start somewhere. Not saying Crane and Curran will be greats but you never know until they are tried.

Lyon's one of the best spinners, not the best overall, but he'd walk into our side hands down

Nathaniel Jacobs wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Agreed Gooseberry but England are plum out of options right now. The mentality to have I prefer thinking like how people felt when Jimmy first burst on the scene. No doubt there was the call that he was toothless but he grew into the finest seamer England have ever produced. I recall Nathan Lyon being lambasted when he first broke into the Aussie team with people saying he was not a suitable replacement for Warne but now he is the best spinner in the world. My point isvnew talent has to be given time to grow and mature in test cricket. They all have to start somewhere. Not saying Crane and Curran will be greats but you never know until they are tried.

Lyon's one of the best spinners, not the best overall, but he'd walk into our side hands down

Yes but he hasnt always been viewed that way, indeed spring last year people were talking him out of the Ashes side.

The point Craig was trying to make is that everyone has to start somewhere ...Shane Warne got destroyed on debut, Steve Smith was a rubbish leg spinner etc.

The Anderson point ... well hes a very differnet case. By the time he played his first Ashes series he was a seasoned international.
And still got destroyed.

My issue with both Crane and Curran is that neither looks like a special talent, and as noted both are really being picked because England have run out of other options.
Currans a good county bowler, but he doesnt have pace or height or the skills that a young Anderson had when he was first picked for the ODIs is Aus. I remember there being a genuine buzz about Anderson and pundits really talking up his potential based on seeing him do things at a young age that established test bowlers couldnt. He has alwats had something special about him, rather just being a solid reliable plonk it on a length bowler like Curran.
Crane might just be the best leg spinner England have had since err Ian Salisbury (??) but thats hardly saying a lot. Its not like hes exactly torn the county scene up ( for all thats worth if youre Jack Leach) and sure he is more of an actual spinner than Dawson is ...but you really need to be a prodigious talent to be a succesaful leg spin bowler in test cricket. Leg spinners are almost totally ineffective in tests the world over now. He may well have a value and role in limited overs if they want to move on from Rashid, but Im hugely skeptical about him becoming a real test bowler. This is not unique to England, that are far better leg spinners (with fine limited overs records) who play most of their tests on Aisian pitches who are struggling to make the same impact in test cricket that decent off spinners like Lyon are.
Rashid came into test cricket with more more experience and years of high performance in county cricket but couldnt make leg spin work. Cranes 75 county wickets at 43 a peice hardly inspire me that hes suddenly going to bambozle Smith and Warner...and if we want to tempt them to get out trying to hit someone out of the park then apparently Joe Root is the man. 

I just dont see either of these two being the solution for England in the short or long term. Happy to be proven wrong of course, but lets not overegg the value of blooding players unless they are ones who are displaying real potential.

Bayliss is asking the batsmen to prove they should be picked, the bowlers are getting in through everyone else being injured or just a complete lack of other options. Cranes the guy who is there, hes the one who will get picked. Theres many surprised to see him ahead of Rashid, Dawson or Leach (all with their own backers and haters) but hey this is what there is. Maybe he will do a Borthwick and surprise everyone ...then never get picked again; that would be typical England!

Not a lot of choice I guess...They really seem to be sure it is a spinner's track - wonder if Australia will agree , and play Agar (in place of ? M Marsh ? Khawaja ? Bird ?) I doubt it ; am expecting Starc back for Bird.

So Anderson and Broad will be supported by (presumably) Curran , and a host of spinners. Australia will be quaking in their boots...

Jokes aside I don't mind seeing Crane tried but this attack looks a bit pale ...and the batting is getting shorter. Not sure if they even have any other (fit) alternatives : Is Overton fit? Ball , Wood ? Again , Curran will give his all but the load on Broad and Anderson has been heavy already ....guess they can put their feet up for a while after this game anyway.

Trying to remember the last time England won a Test in Australia with two spinners a significant factor : Emburey and Edmonds , I think , in 1986. Though the pace bowlers did the bulk of the damage even then. Maybe the SCG will really spin like a top but I'm not placing wagers...

Can't quite agree with Goose re Curran and Crane . On the one hand , Curran is basically in the side because the six or seven fast bowlers ahead of him in the pecking order are or have been injured (TRJ , Finn, Stokes ! Woakes , Overton , Plunkett ? Wood...) so the question of is he worth encouraging is scarcely relevant. He has limitations , from what I've seen ; but is still young and I'm not writing him off just yet.
As for Crane : well an English wrist spinner ? Rare beasts ; Rashid has taken Test wickets - quite a few actually , but rather expensively ; and apparently he is now seen as ODI only. Someone rates Crane as a prospect - his selection is not down to a first class record so it is to be hoped that his advocates are on the money. I do note several Australians who ought to know their stuff think he has something - and I do not think it is all just kidology in this case. Whether he is "ready" or not the opportunity is almost unavoidable this week so they'd be daft not to take it.
As I said earlier I am not betting : but I do hope the young man shows us enough to justify his being bumped up the queue so early. If he can perform reasonably well - not asking for a match winning ten wickets though it would be lovely ! - he would end the tour as a serious prospect for the next Asian tour when extra spin options are essential.

Gooseberry wrote:

Nathaniel Jacobs wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Agreed Gooseberry but England are plum out of options right now. The mentality to have I prefer thinking like how people felt when Jimmy first burst on the scene. No doubt there was the call that he was toothless but he grew into the finest seamer England have ever produced. I recall Nathan Lyon being lambasted when he first broke into the Aussie team with people saying he was not a suitable replacement for Warne but now he is the best spinner in the world. My point isvnew talent has to be given time to grow and mature in test cricket. They all have to start somewhere. Not saying Crane and Curran will be greats but you never know until they are tried.

Lyon's one of the best spinners, not the best overall, but he'd walk into our side hands down

Yes but he hasnt always been viewed that way, indeed spring last year people were talking him out of the Ashes side.

The point Craig was trying to make is that everyone has to start somewhere ...Shane Warne got destroyed on debut, Steve Smith was a rubbish leg spinner etc.

The Anderson point ... well hes a very differnet case. By the time he played his first Ashes series he was a seasoned international.
And still got destroyed.

My issue with both Crane and Curran is that neither looks like a special talent, and as noted both are really being picked because England have run out of other options.
Currans a good county bowler, but he doesnt have pace or height or the skills that a young Anderson had when he was first picked for the ODIs is Aus. I remember there being a genuine buzz about Anderson and pundits really talking up his potential based on seeing him do things at a young age that established test bowlers couldnt. He has alwats had something special about him, rather just being a solid reliable plonk it on a length bowler like Curran.
Crane might just be the best leg spinner England have had since err Ian Salisbury (??) but thats hardly saying a lot. Its not like hes exactly torn the county scene up ( for all thats worth if youre Jack Leach) and sure he is more of an actual spinner than Dawson is ...but you really need to be a prodigious talent to be a succesaful leg spin bowler in test cricket. Leg spinners are almost totally ineffective in tests the world over now. He may well have a value and role in limited overs if they want to move on from Rashid, but Im hugely skeptical about him becoming a real test bowler. This is not unique to England, that are far better leg spinners (with fine limited overs records) who play most of their tests on Aisian pitches who are struggling to make the same impact in test cricket that decent off spinners like Lyon are.
Rashid came into test cricket with more more experience and years of high performance in county cricket but couldnt make leg spin work. Cranes 75 county wickets at 43 a peice hardly inspire me that hes suddenly going to bambozle Smith and Warner...and if we want to tempt them to get out trying to hit someone out of the park then apparently Joe Root is the man. 

I just dont see either of these two being the solution for England in the short or long term. Happy to be proven wrong of course, but lets not overegg the value of blooding players unless they are ones who are displaying real potential.

Bayliss is asking the batsmen to prove they should be picked, the bowlers are getting in through everyone else being injured or just a complete lack of other options. Cranes the guy who is there, hes the one who will get picked. Theres many surprised to see him ahead of Rashid, Dawson or Leach (all with their own backers and haters) but hey this is what there is. Maybe he will do a Borthwick and surprise everyone ...then never get picked again; that would be typical England!

With regards to Curran, he's a likely lad and everybody loves a trier but that's all he is. Essentially a poor mans Bresnan. I've not seen much of Crane, first class record is average at best, but it's seeing what he might offer inthe future. Still don't understand why Rashid with 400 odd first class victims has disappeared from the Test setup.

Warne's debut is overstated, he was mauled by some of the best players of spin in the history of cricket, no shame in that. Crane and Moeen can't get away with that excuse

Good luck Mason! I have no doubt you will you do well. As I've said previously, i believe he's got the temperament for this level despite only being 20. He'll be desperate yo show what he can do.

I think with Rashid it was a mixture of attitude and them feeling he just wasnt going to get any better, they are looking for a genuine front line spinner rather than bits and pieces players like Moeen, Dawson and Rashid. Rashid and Moeen are both avergaing in the 40s (*cough Cranes county average cough*) ... whilst hes had a few good innings for the most part hes neither been able to keep it tight (which England seem to value above wickets) or consitently take wickets.
That doesnt mean I think picking Crane was a great idea, but obviously one of those spin experts in the England camp *cough* rates something in him. But honestly the chances of England devleoping a succesful test leg spinner (with or without a coach) are pretty damn slim.

And in terms of devleoping a spinner for the next tour to the sub continent ....well they dont have any tests lined up there for next winter. So really this game is pretty irrelvant to that.
*edit wait thats wrong ...theres a short unconfirmed tour to Sri Lanka in December. But even so, I still dont think this is massively relevant for a guy whos more likely to have a future in limited overs where leg spin is succesful.

Temperment is one thing ... real ability is another. Hes averaging 60 per wicket so far on the tour playing against second rate opposition (No jokes about Bancroft and Kwajajkljha please) . Good luck to the guy but please dont go laying your savings on an England win.

You need to take something for that itchy throat, Goose.

The first 3 days should be fine and sunny... getting increasingly hotter by Sunday. A scorcher! (37 at SCG; even worse where I am... 42 degrees)
We can probably then expect it to get more unsettled on Monday... Tuesday even worse regards rain.

The Loaded Dog wrote:You need to take something for that itchy throat, Goose.

The first 3 days should be fine and sunny... getting increasingly hotter by Sunday. A scorcher! (37 at SCG; even worse where I am... 42 degrees)
We can probably then expect it to get more unsettled on Monday... Tuesday even worse regards rain.

Im sure Broad and Anderson can wait to bowl 25 overs each on day one in that

If Aus bat first and its not an absolute bunsen from the off England are utterly screwed.

Gooseberry wrote:

The Loaded Dog wrote:You need to take something for that itchy throat, Goose.

The first 3 days should be fine and sunny... getting increasingly hotter by Sunday. A scorcher! (37 at SCG; even worse where I am... 42 degrees)
We can probably then expect it to get more unsettled on Monday... Tuesday even worse regards rain.

Im sure Broad and Anderson can wait to bowl 25 overs each on day one in that

If Aus bat first and its not an absolute bunsen from the off England are utterly screwed.

Yeah, whoever wins the toss... make hay. Sunday will be a killer for whoever is out in the field.
I still think there will be a result even if it rains late Monday/Tuesday.

Not supposed to be hot tomorrow though , is it ?  I see  Sunday is indeed flagged as a scorcher - but with a 60% chance of rain so I'm thinking its all a little unsettled...

I guess it doesn't matter what it does on Tuesday

oops yeah alfie.

Thurs 25 partly cloudy
Fri 28 sunny
Sat 31 partly cloudy
Sun 37 60% chance of late shower
Mon 33 80% chance of rain

Listening to all the talk of lack of back-up options for England kind of makes Anderson's dig at Australia's lack of back-up bowlers a couple of weeks ago even more bizarre. If Australia are struggling on that front then I shudder to think what England's predicament is. Desperate?

England are arguably 9 bowlers down now...aus 1

If Root thinks it's a two spinner pitch then it confirms Aus will play Agar also
In whose place?

My guess in place of Khawaja, moving S.Marsh upto no. 3 or in a surprise move ask Agar to bat at 3

Why doesn't Eng play Wood as their 3rd seamer.....is he also injurd
and why not Jake Ball......tall faster almost 140kph defnitely better than Curran...is he also unfit

I don't think he will be playing, KP_f. This is from late this afternoon (11.20pm now)

"The selectors confirmed Starc's return in place of Jackson Bird as the only change to the team..."

Gooseberry wrote:England are arguably 9 bowlers down now...aus 1

Fair point but of the nine who are out how many of them do you see being viable replacements for Broad and Anderson when they retire? And do you think any of them have the pace to have thrived in Australia?

The biggest loss for his aggresdion and destructive batting is Ben Stokes. The rest I see more as unproven or bit-part players in their career.

The Loaded Dog wrote:I don't think he will be playing, KP_f. This is from late this afternoon (11.20pm now)

"The selectors confirmed Starc's return in place of Jackson Bird as the only change to the team..."

Well this may imply the pitch is not as spinning a pitch as Root thinks

KP_fan wrote:If Root thinks it's a two spinner pitch then it confirms Aus will play Agar also
In whose place?

My guess in place of Khawaja, moving S.Marsh upto no. 3 or in a surprise move ask Agar to bat at 3

Why doesn't Eng play Wood as their 3rd seamer.....is he also injurd
and why not Jake Ball......tall faster almost 140kph defnitely better than Curran...is he also unfit

I don't think they trust Wood to get through a 5 day test match. I think he's now had four surgeries in the past three years on the same ankle...he isn't the bowler he had the potential to be (he can barely maintain his pace for a four over spell, let alone 20 overs in a day).

It's great Jake Ball is tall and slightly faster than the rest, but as we saw in the first test it makes no difference when you're spraying it everywhere in line and length. I've never really seen what England do in him

KP_fan wrote:

The Loaded Dog wrote:I don't think he will be playing, KP_f. This is from late this afternoon (11.20pm now)

"The selectors confirmed Starc's return in place of Jackson Bird as the only change to the team..."

Well this may imply the pitch is not as spinning a pitch as Root thinks

Yes, that is interesting. Australia calls up Agar as cover but don't use him.
Maybe Joe will be proven correct? However I'm sure Smith and the selectors are familiar with how it will play.

The Loaded Dog wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

The Loaded Dog wrote:I don't think he will be playing, KP_f. This is from late this afternoon (11.20pm now)

"The selectors confirmed Starc's return in place of Jackson Bird as the only change to the team..."

Well this may imply the pitch is not as spinning a pitch as Root thinks

Yes, that is interesting. Australia calls up Agar as cover but don't use him.
Maybe Joe will be proven correct? However I'm sure Smith and the selectors are familiar with how it will play.

Or perhaps Root is confident Anderson and Broad will scoop enough wickets and if Crane chips in with one or two then that takes care of things.

To be honest Id rather have Jake Ball doing a Finn and spraying it all over whilst taking wickets than curran continuing to get plaudits for making the pitch look even slower than it was.

And yes craig.. england have a lot of jackson birds.
But Andersons point that Australias success has been built on the front 4 still holds (well them plus smith) .

Yep, our side looks unbalanced and unsuitable for the conditions. However, it's probably the most suitable one we can turn out in all the circumstances - that shouldn't be overlooked amongst all Goose's coughing.

I've read on cricinfo that there's plenty of grass on the pitch which appears to rule Agar out. Meanwhile, we're forced to support Anderson and Broad with a debutant leggie, an off spinner who is horribly out of form and a young seamer with one cap and one wicket to his name. Not looking too great but I still hope we can at least put up a show.

I particularly wish Curran and Crane well.

Any talk of writing Curran off is far too premature - he was never expected to be written on for this series.

Leg spin is probably the most difficult act to master in Test cricket. I see Warne's start has already been mentioned above. Another great or near great (if we are just talking about his leg spin) who took a while to come to terms with bowling at Test level was Benaud. We therefore shouldn't set Crane up for a fall and expect too much. One thing he does have in his favour though - and, I suspect, a lot more than Rashid - is character. That's always important for a touring side and especially amongst the back-up players. Craig's man Illingworth gave a lot of credit to the non-playing squad members for their attitude and allround support when we pulled off an amazing series victory in Australia in '70/71.

All in all, I'm not confident but, for once, I don't think it'll be just the eleven players we should be looking at if the result goes the way I fear. A lot of factors and circumstances have been at work.

Oh ... and to cap it all, I've had to go for an England win in LD's prediction lark!

Gooseberry wrote:To be honest Id rather have Jake Ball doing a Finn and spraying it all over whilst taking wickets than curran continuing to get plaudits for making the pitch look even slower than it was.

And yes craig.. england have a lot of jackson birds.
But Andersons point that Australias success has been built on the front 4 still holds (well them plus smith) .

Well I mean Ball has taken 3 wickets in 4 test matches at an average of 114.33 and a strike rate of 204. A small sample size, but he doesn't "take wickets" either based on what he's shown so far!

Gooseberry wrote:To be honest Id rather have Jake Ball doing a Finn and spraying it all over whilst taking wickets than curran continuing to get plaudits for making the pitch look even slower than it was.

And yes craig.. england have a lot of jackson birds.
But Andersons point that Australias success has been built on the front 4 still holds (well them plus smith) .

With all due respects though, on their one test each in this series, Curran's bowling figures have been slightly better than Ball and Curran did have an awful strip to bowl on.

I know Australia have another quickie up their sleeve if needed in the shape of James Pattinson who has an impressive test record. I'd have to leave others waiting in the wings to The Loaded Dog.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

KP_fan wrote:If Root thinks it's a two spinner pitch then it confirms Aus will play Agar also
In whose place?

My guess in place of Khawaja, moving S.Marsh upto no. 3 or in a surprise move ask Agar to bat at 3

Why doesn't Eng play Wood as their 3rd seamer.....is he also injurd
and why not Jake Ball......tall faster almost 140kph defnitely better than Curran...is he also unfit

I don't think they trust Wood to get through a 5 day test match. I think he's now had four surgeries in the past three years on the same ankle...he isn't the bowler he had the potential to be (he can barely maintain his pace for a four over spell, let alone 20 overs in a day).

shame ...he was threatening once upon a time when I saw him...
why did they bring Wood on tour then.....

why not likes of Jordan and Plunket were considered....
who could both bowl fast enough ( dig it in variety) and have experience too

between Curran and Jake Ball.....the latter would win my selection vote each time....as he is a proper pace bowler
while Curran could aspire to become a bits and pieces player if he could bat a bit

KP

Quite a few of us were surprised not to see Plunkett either in the initial squad or at least called up as the first reserve - while he doesn't have a great Test record (although it's not that bad for the few games he did play), he does look to have the attributes you'd want in Aus: can bowl 90mph, tall, gets good bounce and is reasonably accurate. I wonder if there were concerns over his stamina, as he's played very little 4 day cricket in the last couple of seasons. He was also amongst the players reprimanded for being out on the night of the Stokes incident.

Jordan seems to have slipped off the England radar even in ODI / T20 cricket- I don't know if he's been injured or has finally been judged as unfulfilled potential.

With regard to Curran or Ball, I think Ball's performance in the first Test has done for him as a Test bowler for now (doesn't have enough control for the pace he bowls), and while Curran may not turn out to be anything beyond an honest trier, he might prove useful at least in exerting some pressure while Anderson and Broad attack from the other end. Ideally we would have a spinner who could do this containing job, but even in his best form Moeen tends to go for runs while taking wickets (and at the moment he's in poor form, going for runs and not taking any wickets).

Of course the absence of Stokes has been a big problem for England, as it has adversely affected both the balance of the side and the opportunities to try different things - once Stokes was missing, it became near impossible to drop Moeen for Crane or to play Bairstow as a specialist batsman with Foakes keeping.

Dummy and all - I just get the feeling that Plunkett isn't trusted. Read that as you will.

If he's looking in some time, it would be good to get the views of London Tiger. As mentioned previously, Plunkett only played two CC (four day) matches for Tiger's Yorkshire in 2017 which in itself seems odd.

Curran took 76 f/c wickets at 23.07 in 2015. That would have been the ideal time to make a Test debut at 20. Since then he has had far too much bowling for someone so young, especially at the Oval. It is best he is in the ODI squad for now as that is a better place to show off his skills.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

Gooseberry wrote:To be honest Id rather have Jake Ball doing a Finn and spraying it all over whilst taking wickets than curran continuing to get plaudits for making the pitch look even slower than it was.

And yes craig.. england have a lot of jackson birds.
But Andersons point that Australias success has been built on the front 4 still holds (well them plus smith) .

Well I mean Ball has taken 3 wickets in 4 test matches at an average of 114.33 and a strike rate of 204. A small sample size, but he doesn't "take wickets" either based on what he's shown so far!

Yeash I have no issue with Ball being left out based on his rteurns...but this was in repsonse to a post specifiying someone spraying oit round like Ball...which is pretty much what Finn did with great success.

My point and concern is that England have become over fixated on accuracy and control over wicket taking threat. Now theres always a tension there and obviously ideally youd have both (Starc, or Mitchell Johnson when he works) and so far Balls displayed neither.

But realisticaly can anyone see this England 5 taking 20 wickets when the previous iterations on this tour havent even come close?
Maybe a wildcard bowler is a luxury and we dont really have the option in the squad (unless thats what you consider Crane , but his wicket taking record isnt that great and again even good leg spinners arent that much of a threat in modern test cricket spinning pitch or not) so its alla  bit hypothectical.

But for me the plaudits Curran got for his plodding are out of proportion with what he really delivered, even if it looked skillful it didnt create many chances and wasnt even that economical in context. Sure it was a dog of a pitch and yes it could've been a lot worse but theres nothing to suggest hes a real threat. Again we go back to him being selected and keeping his place because Ball really was that bad and everyone else is unfit or Gary Ballance.

I stand to look like a total Goose here but Im going out on a limb to say I dont see England taking 20 wickets in this game.

So what awaits us today ?

Will Australia finish the job in style , underlining their general superiority over the series ? Or can England build on the MCG revival to gather a consolation win ? Or maybe the Sydney weather will have the last say...

To be honest it is hard to get too optimistic for England : the loss of Woakes is probably a minus - not that he's torn down any trees but he is the third seamer and had at least the potential to take wickets : Mason Crane is a real Wild Card ; and Anderson and Broad must be getting a bit weary after all the work they did in Melbourne.
Australia on the other hand have Starc back for the ineffective Bird so unless they've misread the pitch look to have a better suited bowling combination.

Still you never know : surely Smith is due for a failure ? One can but hope...

Whatever : good luck to Crane and hope for a good match and a more interesting pitch

Wanted to try and stay up and watch some Mason Crane, but the rain and a Boycott monologue has done me in. Fingers crossed he goes well!

Start delayed an hour...toss in 20

Like alfie it is hard to feel optimistic for England. A much-weakened bowling attack on paper and the way the series has gone has to have an effect here? An interest for England will be how Mason Crane fares. Australia will want to end a great series in style and keep England winless Down Under for over a decade.

Rain has delayed the toss until 11am (midnight UK time) with play to start at 11.30am (00.30 UK time). Talk is that toss winner will face a quandary. They will probably choose to bat but there could be quite a bit of help for the bowlers.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Like alfie it is hard to feel optimistic for England. A much-weakened bowling attack on paper and the way the series has gone has to have an effect here? An interest for England will be how Mason Crane fares. Australia will want to end a great series in style and keep England winless Down Under for over a decade.

Rain has delayed the toss until 11am (midnight UK time) with play to start at 11.30am (00.30 UK time). Talk is that toss winner will face a quandary. They will probably choose to bat but there could be quite a bit of help for the bowlers.

Yeah, hard to be optimistic. We lose Woakes and more balance. They get Starc back and more quality fire power.

Hoping Crane and Curran at least put on a decent show. Covered that more today on the 4th Test thread.

As old hands have heard often, two choices on winning the toss. Bat or think about it and bat. We certainly want to be bowling last.

Well the rain returned before the toss came and it is still raining. The rain wasn't forecast to this degree sadly. Disappointing.

Lunch being taken . Toss in 25 mins (12.10 pm Local Time) and play starting after that.

England have won the toss and have elected to bst.

Root does 2 things correctly in winning the toss and choosing to bat.

I'll be back in a few hours when the score is 200/0 or something else. Night all.

guildfordbat wrote:

I'll be back in a few hours when the score is 200/0 or something else. Night all.

It will be something else I think. England to close on 170 for 4 for me.

And finally play gets underway with Starc opening proceedings.