England's Summer of Cricket 2023, Featuring The Ashes

First topic message reminder :

50 up for Mo at an absolutely vital moment.   

A fortuitous way to get there with Cummins not picking it up. It frankly looked like he wasn't moving well chasing back for it either.

Starc back on which I think slows how key a period the Aussies know this is. He's looked their best bowler today.

Sounds like Murphy back for Australia, possibly for Green

England delaying their usual advance announcement to work out who is actually fit to play

Might be Mitchell Marsh who misses out as apparently he may be nursing an injury. Neser appears to be more likely to come in as a fast bowling replacement than Boland.

I was looking at England's white-ball schedule, and it seems a bit absurd but it doesn't end until the 26th September, with an ODI v Ireland at Bristol. But that's just nine days before England's opening World Cup game in India, so there's not going to be much time to adjust to the conditions.

JDizzle wrote:“So far in his Test career he averages just 25 against balls from seamers under 82mph, but 34 against balls 82-87mph and 47 when the speed is 87mph or more.”

Interesting stats on Crawley from Will MacPherson’s piece in the Telegraph. You can see why England persist with him, but it does fall down slightly that whilst only 1% of pace bowlers balls in the CC are 87+ - it is only 17% in Tests. So still a lot of dibble where he averages low 30s.

So to reference the great man again on this thread, Mark Ealham would have him on toast

As for the Australia team, its preferable for England if the Marsh brother doesn't play. Green has had a poor series so far and not really warranted a place in the top 6. Murphy is a bit of an unknown, but actually looked scared to me when bowling in the run chase in the 3rd Test. Clearly I've just jinxed it so that Green will score a double hundred and Murphy take a Roston Chase-esque 8 for

Seems a bit reactionary honestly. If you didn't fancy Murphy at Old Trafford, not sure why you'd think he'd hold up at the Oval.

Be more tempted to bring in another frontline seamer and possibly pick Marsh as a batsmen presuming Cummins will refuse a rest

Duty281 wrote:Might be Mitchell Marsh who misses out as apparently he may be nursing an injury. Neser appears to be more likely to come in as a fast bowling replacement than Boland.

I was looking at England's white-ball schedule, and it seems a bit absurd but it doesn't end until the 26th September, with an ODI v Ireland at Bristol. But that's just nine days before England's opening World Cup game in India, so there's not going to be much time to adjust to the conditions.

England haven't actually played that much ODI cricket since the last CWC. Especially their full strength side when accounting for rotation. So I'd presume they are just trying to get as much 50 over practice as possible in ahead of time. They will inevitably make changes throughout all of these ODIs as they try to find the right pieces.

1.Roy/Hales/Salt 2.Bairstow 3.Root 4.Brook/Malan 5.Buttler (c) (wk) 6.Livingstone/Jacks 7.Moeen 8.Surran 9.Woakes 10.Wood 11.Rashid

My guess is they will structure something like that with Buttler shifting up to 5 to accommodate a batting all-rounder that bowls spin at 6. Then 5 bowling options with plenty of batting depth at 7-11. There's lots of a quality in the top 6 but question marks over who fits where.

The other structure is having Buttler at 6 with both Malan and Brook in the middle order to stack the batting. It just doesn't work for me without Stokes able to bowl as a top 5 batter. I'd much prefer the extra bowling given they should bat deep anyway as Surran and Woakes should make it in as bowlers.

Seam depth is an issue with Jof, Mahmood and Stone all injured. Reece Topley should be thereabouts if fit as a PP and death option. David Willey feels likely as a rotation option for Surran and Woakes? Maybe Brydon Carse as a quicker option to rotate Wood? Chris Jordan and Luke Wood are T20 options to me.

Rehan and Dawson are presumably the two options as reserve spinner.

GSC wrote:Seems a bit reactionary honestly. If you didn't fancy Murphy at Old Trafford, not sure why you'd think he'd hold up at the Oval.

Be more tempted to bring in another frontline seamer and possibly pick Marsh as a batsmen presuming Cummins will refuse a rest

I think you need a spin option simply for a change of pace and rhythm on flat decks. Therefore Murphy is the right balance IMO.

Whilst the spinner's figures themselves might not be flattering in isolation it's so important to view selection as a whole. In this case how cooked the seamers were at OT leading to some atrocious figures. Had you offered Cummins a spinner going at 5 to 6 runs per over whilst keeping his seamers fresher in that innings he'd have likely torn your arm off. That's before we consider England's propensity for giving wickets away to changes in pace.

8.Neser 9.Cummins 10.Starc/Hazlewood/Boland 11.Murphy

I'd say that's Australia's best balance all things considered with the third seamer being based on how Starc and Hazlewood pull up.

This discussion once again highlights what a gigantic moment in the series Lyon's injury was though.

king_carlos wrote:

GSC wrote:Seems a bit reactionary honestly. If you didn't fancy Murphy at Old Trafford, not sure why you'd think he'd hold up at the Oval.

Be more tempted to bring in another frontline seamer and possibly pick Marsh as a batsmen presuming Cummins will refuse a rest

I think you need a spin option simply for a change of pace and rhythm on flat decks. Therefore Murphy is the right balance IMO.

Whilst the spinner's figures themselves might not be flattering in isolation it's so important to view selection as a whole. In this case how cooked the seamers were at OT leading to some atrocious figures. Had you offered Cummins a spinner going at 5 to 6 runs per over whilst keeping his seamers fresher in that innings he'd have likely torn your arm off. That's before we consider England's propensity for giving wickets away to changes in pace.

8.Neser 9.Cummins 10.Starc/Hazlewood/Boland 11.Murphy

I'd say that's Australia's best balance all things considered with the third seamer being based on how Starc and Hazlewood pull up.

This discussion once again highlights what a gigantic moment in the series Lyon's injury was though.

Before coming to Murphy, I'd say Starc clearly should be batting above Cummins. He clearly is the better bat for me, though Cummins can seem more organized in terms of technique.
As for Murphy, since Steve Smith is not inclined to bowl as his non-appearance even during the carnage indicates, its not a great call on Australia's part to leave it all to Travis Head's parttime slow bowling. Murphy is a good option in really turning tracks. Doesn't put the revolutions that will give him much on flattish tracks, and seems rather limited in skill set. But he's what they've got, and they might have to do with that. Mitch Marsh playing as batter only? Wow! What is the world coming to? If Marsh is fully fit, he stays in because he has the performances that Green doesn't. But if Mitch isn't fully fit, he goes out and Green stays in.
Think they should be careful with Starc. He's so very important as an ODI bowler and shouldn't risk any serious injury to him. If he's fully fit to go, then play him. Else Neser or Abbot. Boland should play only if Hazelwood can't make it. Don't think Cummins should playing the next game, he appeared mentally shot in the last game. He's better off leaving this one alone, but I have a feeling he's determined to play, and physically, he seemed fit enough, and as such, there is every chance the skipper will be there...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/66304744

England's five test tour to India has been officially scheduled. England aren't exactly going to the bright lights on this tour.

I know we want more Test cricket but a 5 Test series for England in India this winter just feels ludicrous given how poorly England will likely perform with our spin bowling resources. They played a 4 Test series followed by 8 white ball games out there in 2021, then the return Test series in England in the summer of 2021, then the re-arranged one off Test and white ball series in 2022.

The legacy of the big three carve up increasingly looking like India, England and Australia playing each other in a never ending bilateral merry-go-round of diminishing returns.

msp83 wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

GSC wrote:Seems a bit reactionary honestly. If you didn't fancy Murphy at Old Trafford, not sure why you'd think he'd hold up at the Oval.

Be more tempted to bring in another frontline seamer and possibly pick Marsh as a batsmen presuming Cummins will refuse a rest

I think you need a spin option simply for a change of pace and rhythm on flat decks. Therefore Murphy is the right balance IMO.

Whilst the spinner's figures themselves might not be flattering in isolation it's so important to view selection as a whole. In this case how cooked the seamers were at OT leading to some atrocious figures. Had you offered Cummins a spinner going at 5 to 6 runs per over whilst keeping his seamers fresher in that innings he'd have likely torn your arm off. That's before we consider England's propensity for giving wickets away to changes in pace.

8.Neser 9.Cummins 10.Starc/Hazlewood/Boland 11.Murphy

I'd say that's Australia's best balance all things considered with the third seamer being based on how Starc and Hazlewood pull up.

This discussion once again highlights what a gigantic moment in the series Lyon's injury was though.

Before coming to Murphy, I'd say Starc clearly should be batting above Cummins. He clearly is the better bat for me, though Cummins can seem more organized in terms of technique.
As for Murphy, since Steve Smith is not inclined to bowl as his non-appearance even during the carnage indicates, its not a great call on Australia's part to leave it all to Travis Head's parttime slow bowling. Murphy is a good option in really turning tracks. Doesn't put the revolutions that will give him much on flattish tracks, and seems rather limited in skill set. But he's what they've got, and they might have to do with that. Mitch Marsh playing as batter only? Wow! What is the world coming to? If Marsh is fully fit, he stays in because he has the performances that Green doesn't. But if Mitch isn't fully fit, he goes out and Green stays in.
Think they should be careful with Starc. He's so very important as an ODI bowler and shouldn't risk any serious injury to him. If he's fully fit to go, then play him. Else Neser or Abbot. Boland should play only if Hazelwood can't make it. Don't think Cummins should playing the next game, he appeared mentally shot in the last game. He's better off leaving this one alone, but I have a feeling he's determined to play, and physically, he seemed fit enough, and as such, there is every chance the skipper will be there...

If Starc's the one of those fit then obviously he bats above Cummins. He's got a significantly better average and 10 Test half centuries to Cummins 2. I just listed the option together at 9 for ease though.

Smith hasn't bowled properly for a long while now due to his back. Similar to Williamson never bowling anymore due to his elbow. Both still get suggested by fans as options consistently, oddly, but neither actually bowl anymore. Smudge for instance was bowling for Sussex earlier this season but it was to Michael Neser at the end of a game that was destined for a draw and Smith was bowling offies rather than leggies basically for a laugh!

At this stage I wouldn't be surprised if Starc would prioritise trying to win a Test series in England over white ball honours. He's already won a CWC and World T20. He was the best white ball bowler in the game for a time but shunned the franchise circuit largely because he wanted to spend his 'down time' with his wife and by virtue the Aussie women's team who he has frequently coached. I'm not sure he has much left to prove in the white ball game. Whereas this Aussie team spoke a lot before this winter (winter for them anyway!) about trying to win a series in India, the WTC and a series in England as their final frontier or "bucket list" items to quote them. They came up short in India, won the WTC final, have the retained the Ashes but will desperately want to win the series having drawn in 2019.

This Australia team has so many great players but the lack of away Test cricket they play means few consider them a great Test team. They have a brilliant record at home of course but then so do many sides. England have maintained a largely good record at home despite not having a top 3 for a decade! I think the senior players in this Aussie group are singularly focused on trying to get a statement away series win here in the same way the England white ball side were so focused on that 2019 CWC. I think the upcoming 50 over CWC is very much in the background by comparison. Also worth noting that as Starc's Test form has improved with changes to his action, that control with the white ball has also diminished. He was of course dropped, rightly or wrongly, in the World T20.

If Starc simply isn't fit due to that shoulder knock it's of course a different discussion. But if he's recovered well then I'd be very surprised if he sat out to save him for the ODI setup.

king_carlos wrote:

msp83 wrote:

king_carlos wrote:

GSC wrote:Seems a bit reactionary honestly. If you didn't fancy Murphy at Old Trafford, not sure why you'd think he'd hold up at the Oval.

Be more tempted to bring in another frontline seamer and possibly pick Marsh as a batsmen presuming Cummins will refuse a rest

I think you need a spin option simply for a change of pace and rhythm on flat decks. Therefore Murphy is the right balance IMO.

Whilst the spinner's figures themselves might not be flattering in isolation it's so important to view selection as a whole. In this case how cooked the seamers were at OT leading to some atrocious figures. Had you offered Cummins a spinner going at 5 to 6 runs per over whilst keeping his seamers fresher in that innings he'd have likely torn your arm off. That's before we consider England's propensity for giving wickets away to changes in pace.

8.Neser 9.Cummins 10.Starc/Hazlewood/Boland 11.Murphy

I'd say that's Australia's best balance all things considered with the third seamer being based on how Starc and Hazlewood pull up.

This discussion once again highlights what a gigantic moment in the series Lyon's injury was though.

Before coming to Murphy, I'd say Starc clearly should be batting above Cummins. He clearly is the better bat for me, though Cummins can seem more organized in terms of technique.
As for Murphy, since Steve Smith is not inclined to bowl as his non-appearance even during the carnage indicates, its not a great call on Australia's part to leave it all to Travis Head's parttime slow bowling. Murphy is a good option in really turning tracks. Doesn't put the revolutions that will give him much on flattish tracks, and seems rather limited in skill set. But he's what they've got, and they might have to do with that. Mitch Marsh playing as batter only? Wow! What is the world coming to? If Marsh is fully fit, he stays in because he has the performances that Green doesn't. But if Mitch isn't fully fit, he goes out and Green stays in.
Think they should be careful with Starc. He's so very important as an ODI bowler and shouldn't risk any serious injury to him. If he's fully fit to go, then play him. Else Neser or Abbot. Boland should play only if Hazelwood can't make it. Don't think Cummins should playing the next game, he appeared mentally shot in the last game. He's better off leaving this one alone, but I have a feeling he's determined to play, and physically, he seemed fit enough, and as such, there is every chance the skipper will be there...

If Starc's the one of those fit then obviously he bats above Cummins. He's got a significantly better average and 10 Test half centuries to Cummins 2. I just listed the option together at 9 for ease though.

Smith hasn't bowled properly for a long while now due to his back. Similar to Williamson never bowling anymore due to his elbow. Both still get suggested by fans as options consistently, oddly, but neither actually bowl anymore. Smudge for instance was bowling for Sussex earlier this season but it was to Michael Neser at the end of a game that was destined for a draw and Smith was bowling offies rather than leggies basically for a laugh!

At this stage I wouldn't be surprised if Starc would prioritise trying to win a Test series in England over white ball honours. He's already won a CWC and World T20. He was the best white ball bowler in the game for a time but shunned the franchise circuit largely because he wanted to spend his 'down time' with his wife and by virtue the Aussie women's team who he has frequently coached. I'm not sure he has much left to prove in the white ball game. Whereas this Aussie team spoke a lot before this winter (winter for them anyway!) about trying to win a series in India, the WTC and a series in England as their final frontier or "bucket list" items to quote them. They came up short in India, won the WTC final, have the retained the Ashes but will desperately want to win the series having drawn in 2019.

This Australia team has so many great players but the lack of away Test cricket they play means few consider them a great Test team. They have a brilliant record at home of course but then so do many sides. England have maintained a largely good record at home despite not having a top 3 for a decade! I think the senior players in this Aussie group are singularly focused on trying to get a statement away series win here in the same way the England white ball side were so focused on that 2019 CWC. I think the upcoming 50 over CWC is very much in the background by comparison. Also worth noting that as Starc's Test form has improved with changes to his action, that control with the white ball has also diminished. He was of course dropped, rightly or wrongly, in the World T20.

If Starc simply isn't fit due to that shoulder knock it's of course a different discussion. But if he's recovered well then I'd be very surprised if he sat out to save him for the ODI setup.

Starc has been clear that he would prioritize playing for Australia over the Leagues. He gives his all for test cricket. But the point is that even the T-20 WC indicated how important he can be for the white ball side. If he's fit and fine, no point resting him as such, but if he's not a hundred percent, no point risking him with the WC close by. Players often play through when they are say 90 percent. No point doing that with Starc for this game is my point. When he was bowling later on in the England innings, he just didn't look right. He managed, but I don't think he should be going in in such a situation.

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Might be Mitchell Marsh who misses out as apparently he may be nursing an injury. Neser appears to be more likely to come in as a fast bowling replacement than Boland.

I was looking at England's white-ball schedule, and it seems a bit absurd but it doesn't end until the 26th September, with an ODI v Ireland at Bristol. But that's just nine days before England's opening World Cup game in India, so there's not going to be much time to adjust to the conditions.

England haven't actually played that much ODI cricket since the last CWC. Especially their full strength side when accounting for rotation. So I'd presume they are just trying to get as much 50 over practice as possible in ahead of time. They will inevitably make changes throughout all of these ODIs as they try to find the right pieces.

1.Roy/Hales/Salt 2.Bairstow 3.Root 4.Brook/Malan 5.Buttler (c) (wk) 6.Livingstone/Jacks 7.Moeen 8.Surran 9.Woakes 10.Wood 11.Rashid

My guess is they will structure something like that with Buttler shifting up to 5 to accommodate a batting all-rounder that bowls spin at 6. Then 5 bowling options with plenty of batting depth at 7-11. There's lots of a quality in the top 6 but question marks over who fits where.

The other structure is having Buttler at 6 with both Malan and Brook in the middle order to stack the batting. It just doesn't work for me without Stokes able to bowl as a top 5 batter. I'd much prefer the extra bowling given they should bat deep anyway as Surran and Woakes should make it in as bowlers.

Seam depth is an issue with Jof, Mahmood and Stone all injured. Reece Topley should be thereabouts if fit as a PP and death option. David Willey feels likely as a rotation option for Surran and Woakes? Maybe Brydon Carse as a quicker option to rotate Wood? Chris Jordan and Luke Wood are T20 options to me.

Rehan and Dawson are presumably the two options as reserve spinner.

Honestly I think Brook is pretty nailed on for one of the middle order slots mate - and the opener slot is probably between Malan and Roy, I don't think Hales is near consideration for the 50 over side (last time he played a 50 over game for any professional side was in May 2019), and think Salt is probably a bit off Roy and Malan in the 50 over stuff at the minute. I'd say Malan has the inside track at the moment...but in the last ODI series in Bangladesh, Roy did score a good hundred (for whatever that is worth)

It's a very strong looking XI, but probably lacks a real "X Factor" type bowler, the like of which we found with Jof before the 2019 World Cup. Not sure such a bowler will be found this time round...

king_carlos wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Might be Mitchell Marsh who misses out as apparently he may be nursing an injury. Neser appears to be more likely to come in as a fast bowling replacement than Boland.

I was looking at England's white-ball schedule, and it seems a bit absurd but it doesn't end until the 26th September, with an ODI v Ireland at Bristol. But that's just nine days before England's opening World Cup game in India, so there's not going to be much time to adjust to the conditions.

England haven't actually played that much ODI cricket since the last CWC. Especially their full strength side when accounting for rotation. So I'd presume they are just trying to get as much 50 over practice as possible in ahead of time. They will inevitably make changes throughout all of these ODIs as they try to find the right pieces.

1.Roy/Hales/Salt 2.Bairstow 3.Root 4.Brook/Malan 5.Buttler (c) (wk) 6.Livingstone/Jacks 7.Moeen 8.Surran 9.Woakes 10.Wood 11.Rashid

My guess is they will structure something like that with Buttler shifting up to 5 to accommodate a batting all-rounder that bowls spin at 6. Then 5 bowling options with plenty of batting depth at 7-11. There's lots of a quality in the top 6 but question marks over who fits where.

The other structure is having Buttler at 6 with both Malan and Brook in the middle order to stack the batting. It just doesn't work for me without Stokes able to bowl as a top 5 batter. I'd much prefer the extra bowling given they should bat deep anyway as Surran and Woakes should make it in as bowlers.

Seam depth is an issue with Jof, Mahmood and Stone all injured. Reece Topley should be thereabouts if fit as a PP and death option. David Willey feels likely as a rotation option for Surran and Woakes? Maybe Brydon Carse as a quicker option to rotate Wood? Chris Jordan and Luke Wood are T20 options to me.

Rehan and Dawson are presumably the two options as reserve spinner.

Yeah, I don't have a complaint about England playing ODI cricket, I just thinking shoving it in so close to the World Cup (because of the Hundred) isn't the best idea. Ideally England would be playing the games in August/early September, going off to India 2-3 weeks before the start of the World Cup, and playing a few ODIs out there before the tournament starts.

It's all a bit of a struggle to remember what England's ODI team should be as, like you say, they haven't played much recently, and the games they have played were often with second/third string players. But I would have thought:

1) Bairstow; 2) Malan; 3) Root; 4) Brook; 5) Buttler; 6) Livingstone as the top six. I don't think Hales is in consideration, and Salt had a poor winter if I remember rightly. I think we know Stokes isn't coming back. Roy may still have an outside chance of returning.

It's below the top six where things get a bit more complicated. Rashid and Wood should be certainties of course, but will Wood be able to play every World Cup game? Woakes and Curran may take two spots, or might be battling for just one. Topley's on his way back, but can Stone recover in time? I presume Archer is injured as I haven't heard anything since he was ruled out of the summer. And will Moeen take up a spot, undeservedly, or will England take a chance on Jacks or even Rehan Ahmed? Isn't Carse also injured?

Anyway, there's a test match before that.

England go unchanged for the Oval. One more chance for Jimmy and Woakes/Wood have obviously been given the OK. Should get a result in this one.

Unchanged XI surprises me a bit. Thought there would be at least one "fresh" bowler brought in.

On the other hand , this team dominated that recently "concluded" match and if they are all rested and recovered I guess there is a case for going with it again. If not for the biblical floods I suppose they might be saying "never change a winning team" ? So similar principle...

I reckon I would have found a way to get Tongue in , for some extra pace. But then I wouldn't have had Crawley in the team all along so what do I know

Good luck to the lads.

Eng retain Anderson.
Sentimentality prevails overs hard win at all cost logic.
Understandable though, when the guy is your all-time-great

We saw how India carried the liability-greatness of Tendulkar & Kapil Dev on their shoulders for much past the expiry date of these all time greats.
Tendulakr was dragged in the end when he had turned half blind and not seeing the ball in many of his dismissals....and Kapil was probably trundling in at 125kph for the last year.

Anderson could have made it easier and stepped away after a "discussion" for this series on line game.
And his board could have discussed & arranged a farewell game or two against Ire, BD or SL next summer. f
For Tendulkar in the end BCCI "arranged" a two match farewell series by specially inviting WI.

We wait to see what Aus does with team?
Starc won't be in the way he was holding his calf or was it hamstring.
Hazelwood's fitness has been on and off.
Murphy should be in and Green could be playing as a bowler ?


Rain robbed Eng in T4....but looking back Rain gave Eng the purple patch of better conditions in T3 when Woakes, Wood and Broad bundled Aus & then had better batting conditions next day to chase.

2-1 as it stands is more or less a fair reflection of relative strengths of teams...Eng could have added more potency by having Tongue for Anderson.

Think I would probably have Tongue in for Anderson assuming Robinson isn't fit. But the important 3 have been Broad, Wood and Woakes, so getting a third game from them can be a bonus

Australia (probable) 1 David Warner, 2 Usman Khawaja, 3 Marnus Labuschagne, 4 Steven Smith, 5 Travis Head, 6 Mitchell Marsh, 7 Alex Carey (wk), 8 Mitchell Starc, 9 Pat Cummins (capt), 10 Todd Murphy, 11 Josh Hazlewood

Cricinfo reckoning that Australia will keep things largely the same, with Murphy in for Green as the sole change. Guessing Australia will bat first if they win the toss to extend the recovery time for their pace attack.

I'm also surprised that England are unchanged. Woakes was nursing a minor knock, plus Wood doesn't usually manage three tests in a row. Anderson bowled better than his figures indicate in the last test, and he has retained an excellent control through the series which increases pressure and can yield results at the other end.

A good chance for England in this test, but don't be surprised if the under-firing Australian batting order roar back with a large first innings score.

GSC wrote:Think I would probably have Tongue in for Anderson assuming Robinson isn't fit. But the important 3 have been Broad, Wood and Woakes, so getting a third game from them can be a bonus

I'd have gone for Tongue over Anderson as well at The Oval in particular.

Robinson once again needs to go away and work on his conditioning. Hopefully that's not something we keep thinking throughout his career. As he broke through later it's easy to forget he's 30 in a few months. So hardly a kid that can be excused for still needing to learn the realities of being a professional sportsman. It's frustrating as he has all the natural skills to be fantastic.

Broad, Wood and Woakes have been our best bowlers in the series. Hopefully we don't see them tail off though. Wood rarely plays 3 Tests in a row, Woakes had issue last week and Broad is playing 5 on the bounce at 37-years-old. A big strength in the last Test was our bowlers looking fresher as the Aussies flagged. The rain meant Australia didn't have a second bowling innings and a bigger break before T5.

It is still a very interestingly poised game. Australia should be desperate for a series win given the lack of away success (or playing much away Test cricket at all) is the main query against how good this side are. England meanwhile won't want to lose a first Ashes series in England since 2001.

Bit of overrating Josh Tongue and (somehow) underrating of Jimmy Anderson going on here - if Jimmy is fit, he plays over Tongue everyday, even despite a slightly down series.

Plus it is likely his final ever home Ashes test - he has to play. I don't really give a hoot if its "sentimental".

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Bit of overrating Josh Tongue and (somehow) underrating of Jimmy Anderson going on here - if Jimmy is fit, he plays over Tongue everyday, even despite a slightly down series.

Plus it is likely his final ever home Ashes test - he has to play. I don't really give a hoot if its "sentimental".

For me it's just a simple case of feeling the attack has looked better with extra pace on the surfaces they've elected for, rightly or wrongly, in this series. Horses for courses.

For what it's worth I think there's a strong argument for Jimmy going to India for instance given his record there and ability to bowl so economically.

The above said, I do quite like that England will have a seamer celebrate his 41st birthday during the final Ashes Test of a series!

Might be some reduced play tomorrow with rain forecast for the afternoon.

Stokes also talking about sorting out his knee during a six-month break between this final test and England's next one.

Duty281 wrote:Stokes also talking about sorting out his knee during a six-month break between this final test and England's next one.

The Wisden pod mentioned he might be going under the knife. They're usually a well informed collection of journalists.

I'll be interested to see whether it's an op that can fix his knee for bowling or simply fix it to the extent he can move and bat without pain. As those are two very different things from the Test teams perspective going forward. Obviously, it needs to be done either way. He's very clearly in pain pretty much any time he moves at the moment.

I definitely think Stokes can be a huge asset as a batter and captain if that's the end result. It makes the team harder to balance given England rarely look great with 3 seamers and spinner. But he's definitely a good enough batter to play as one. Realistically, you'd expect it to be higher up the order in that scenario though as there aren't many experienced specialist batters at number 6.

Move Brook down and classify him as an all rounder

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/66320717

Archer might make the World Cup...

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/men-s-hundred-2023-olly-stone-ruled-out-of-hundred-with-hamstring-injury-1389471

And Stone out of the Hundred, indicating a return is a little way off for him.

The dream is England picking a pace attack of Jofra, Stone and Mahmood, and day 4 is just Root, Leach and Brooks bowling 30 overs each

I'd guess on Stokes they'll look to prolong his career by turning into a specialist batsmen. Does create a problem with the balance of the team, but which batsmen to leave out has rarely been one England have had in recent times

GSC wrote:The dream is England picking a pace attack of Jofra, Stone and Mahmood, and day 4 is just Root, Leach and Brooks bowling 30 overs each

Mahmood being in this instead of Wood hurts my brain as well as my heart.

It feels like longer than 6 weeks ago that England were bowling Harry Brook first change for a laugh though.

Looking at the leading run scorers list, there's something oddly beautiful to me about Crawley and Khawaja being 1 and 2 with strike rates of 89.95 and 39.22 respectively. I've always maintained across sports that variety is what makes a game interesting. If everyone played 'the right way' it'd be so boring. How well both those openers have batted in completely different styles sums up why I love Tests in a way.

Glad to see Stokes is taking six months off. Maybe he can "fix" that knee in that time frame ? I don't want him to be a main bowler ; but if he can get back to bowling the odd incisive spell and balance the team nicely again that would be just what England need going forward.

Also heartening to hear some optimism about Archer's WC chances (I really don't expect him back for Tests - certainly not for a tour of India) . May just be "hopeful". But if he could make it in October it would give the team a bit of a lift , even if he had to be managed , game on , game off...

And further to Olly's point above : yes , if they are all fit , this is England's best pace attack and logical enough to pick them - they actually complement each other rather well. My concern (and reason for musing on Tongue as a likely inclusion) is the issue of wear and tear . Woakes' niggles at Old Trafford , Wood unaccustomed to three games in a row , Broad the indestructible playing all five - thought he looked just a bit over cooked in that last innings. Jimmy might actually be the one I'm least worried about this week

Just have to trust the physios are on top of things.

Still don't know what Australia will do to refresh attack ?

Between Anderson and Tongue overall, there is no question whatsoever. But the Anderson of today, at 41, is not the same bowler that he was. He's a lot more dependent on conditions, and is not quite a strike bowler in flat conditions. Speed is important on these tracks, and Anderson who was never that quick, has slowed down even further. Tongue is quick, and has shown that he has the makings to belong at this level. The one thing missing in Anderson's CV is a solid record against Australia. His record is rather pedestrian against them. He has just not been able to make an impact in this series. And he hasn't usually been at his best at the Oval that has produced a lot of flat or flattish test tracks over the years.

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/66320717

Archer might make the World Cup...

https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/men-s-hundred-2023-olly-stone-ruled-out-of-hundred-with-hamstring-injury-1389471

And Stone out of the Hundred, indicating a return is a little way off for him.

Think Stone is aiming to return for the Ireland ODI series in September.

Be handy if both him and Jof can be fit for the World Cup - if only to rotate in for Wood for the odd game to give him a rest, and be able to replace him with a suitable alternate. Doubt any of the three will be able to play every game of the comp!

Odd line in the papers this morning that Stokes is considering taking up spin bowling to continue as an all rounder

king_carlos wrote:
...

Looking at the leading run scorers list, there's something oddly beautiful to me about Crawley and Khawaja being 1 and 2 with strike rates of 89.95 and 39.22 respectively. I've always maintained across sports that variety is what makes a game interesting. If everyone played 'the right way' it'd be so boring. How well both those openers have batted in completely different styles sums up why I love Tests in a way.

Oh absolutely, Carlos!

Apologies for this geriatric fool going totally off topic but your comment reminds me of a saying of ex football manager Lawrie McMenemy. McMenemy was a canny manager, born in Gateshead and a former Coldstream Guard, who I'm pleased to say is still with us at the age of 87. His day in the sun was in May 1976 when his second tier Southampton side beat Tommy Docherty's on paper far stronger and more talented Manchester United to win the FA Cup. McMenenemy used to maintain - and probably still does - that, ''A good and effective team needs a mix of piano players, piano tuners and piano shifters.''

Meanwhile, 20 miles or so south of the Oval, grey and overcast with the threat of rain in the air.

Bad news is that there'll almost certainly be interruptions. Good news is news that there will be some play and the Oval does have a good drainage system.

Moeen Ali has no regrets about answering Ben Stokes' Ashes SOS... but England all-rounder says he won't tour India (probably!)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricket/article-12337351/Moeen-Ali-no-regrets-answering-Ben-Stokes-Ashes-SOS-England-rounder-says-wont-tour-India-probably.html

Ali in Dailymail. That Probably in parenthesis  
and that statement from him below,  I am afraid might trigger a Meltdown among some English fans and supporters


'No chance I'll do India,' he says. 'I can't see it happening.' So this week Moeen will play, in all likelihood, his last Test.

In typically Moeen fashion, though, he does not want it to be a farewell, insisting that 'things can change whenever'.

Ironically enough , Moeen might be more use to England in India than in this series (not that he has been entirely useless ; but I think even KP-fan will admit that Leach would have been a superior option if available).

But I reckon he's done with Tests after this match. Will want to concentrate on the white ball stuff , both England and franchise , to round out his career.

But let that not stop you and Duty from running a separate thread during the Test , if you are still keen

Moeen's selection is one of three main factors that cost England this series, alongside the preparation of flat wickets and giving Bairstow the gloves, not Foakes. Moeen's bowling average has been 64.5 this series, worse than even I thought and my expectations were on the floor.

Frustrating, because Australia were actually there for the taking. Well below their best and Lyon's injury blew a gaping hole in their team.

So, yes, no thank you to Moeen in India.

alfie wrote:Ironically enough , Moeen might be more use to England in India than in this series (not that he has been entirely useless ; but I think even KP-fan will admit that Leach would have been a superior option if available).

But I reckon he's done with Tests after this match.  Will want to concentrate on the white ball stuff , both England and franchise , to round out his career.

But let that not stop you and Duty from running a separate thread during the Test , if you are still keen

As I read this "interview" of Moeen he is leaving the side door and many windows open &dropping a message for Stokes.

If you plead, placate, patronize and pamper me l am.open to play in India

Looks like a bowl-first morning with all this cloud.

Surely Australia win the toss this time? And they do. Australia will indeed bowl first. Murphy in for Green, that's the only change.

Bowl first seems to be the popular caper this year. Murphy in for Green ; but no fresh pace bowlers for Australia any more than England so could be some tired legs by Monday...

As I think Carlos indicated, this will be the last Ashes test for so many, so it has a strange, last-day-of-school feel.

https://www.606v2.com/t71012p400-england-s-summer-of-cricket-2023-featuring-the-ashes

Interesting to go back to our pre-series predictions to Duty's questions

Olly wrote:Series score - England 1-3 Australia
Top Aussie runscorer - Marnus Labuschagne
Top English runscorer - Ollie Pope
Top Aussie wicket-taker - Nathan Lyon
Top English wicket-taker - Stuart Broad
Player of the series - Cameron Green
Flop of the series - Ben Duckett
Surprise of the series - Alex Carey

And some extra yes/no questions if you fancy:

Any opener to make a century this series? Yes - one each from the most maligned on each side, Crawley and Warner.
Any player to make a double-century this series? Yes.
Any test to be won by fewer than 20 runs and/or by one wicket? No.
Will Anderson (685 wickets) level or overtake Warne (708 wickets) this series? No.
Will Crawley play all five tests? Yes.
Will either team be bowled out for a two-digit score at any point this series? Yes.
Will either team make 650+ at any point this series? No.
Will Smith make more centuries than the rest of the Aussie batting combined? No.
Will Cummins take 30+ wickets in the series? No

Fairly decent strike rate - albeit couldn't have got Cam Green more incorrect! Did call the Crawley hundred tho

Duty281 wrote:As I think Carlos indicated, this will be the last Ashes test for so many, so it has a strange, last-day-of-school feel.

Yep, it's an odd group in that regard. Many of them have faced off a lot of times.

Warner, Jimmy, Broad and Moeen seem varying degrees of certainty for this being an Ashes swansong. There are growing rumours around Smudge as well though and those murmurs have been floating about for 6 months or so now.

I really hope Stokes and Wood make the return down under but there have to be some questions there, realistically. Likewise with Bairstow depending on form and fitness to keep.

Cummins and Root should make the next Ashes but for something unforeseen. It wouldn't be a huge surprise if Hazlewood (due to injuries) or Starc moved on before the next series though.

Khawaja might want to go on a bit longer if his form holds up given he missed a few years being in and out of the team.

Woakes certainly shouldn't be in Australia so he'd be 38 by the next home Ashes. That's not impossible given his bowling style but he has had injuries in the last few years.

Then we're into the young 'uns. Marnus, Brook, Head and Green should certainly play plenty more Ashes cricket based on talent. Would I honestly be amazed if a couple of Crawley, Duckett, Carey and Murphy fell out of favour? No. I rate Murphy for instance and would have picked him at OT but maybe someone better comes through. Maybe others lose form, etc.

Mitch Marsh will of course play again and score a ton having average 2.7 against all other Test attacks.

Aus have found swing but have been wayward
too straight.....need to bring it into the channel 3 overs in a row with no hit.me balls

Don't think there's been enough to justify bowling first. They were seduced by the overhead conditions.

Not watching, but always surprised when a team bowls first at The Oval - usually a great batting deck, once you get through the first session in particular. Massively overcast?

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Not watching, but always surprised when a team bowls first at The Oval - usually a great batting deck, once you get through the first session in particular. Massively overcast?

Yeah, very overcast, but ball not doing much and it's been a gentle start.