Print

[Manormanic]

I think they will persist with Hughes, I don't think Quiney will get another shot. We need to settle on a top order and let them play themselves into form

It was shocking though that they picked him after admitting that he was not good enough to play against South Africa.  Quiney...is he destined to be one of those people mentioned in dispatches in fifteen years time as being unlucky as to who and how he got his chance?

[Number4]

It was shocking though that they picked him after admitting that he was not good enough to play against South Africa.  Quiney...is he destined to be one of those people mentioned in dispatches in fifteen years time as being unlucky as to who and how he got his chance?

I think in 15 years time it will be Quiney who?

[Manormanic]

I think in 15 years time it will be Quiney who?

Do you not reckon he'd have scored well against this ri Lankan attack though?

[Number4]

Do you not reckon he'd have scored well against this ri Lankan attack though?

Didn't say he wouldn't .... He will just be one of the forgotten ones

[Manormanic]

Didn't say he wouldn't .... He will just be one of the forgotten ones

Ah, the Mark Lathwell of Australian cricket...

...of course, they could bring him in for the next test if Pup is missing...

[Number4]

Ah, the Mark Lathwell of Australian cricket...

...of course, they could bring him in for the next test if Pup is missing...

Or Usman

[vividgreen]

The English would definitely have to start favourites at Home as i think the Aussies will again struggle against the swinging ball. I'm not convinced that the top order is well equipped for a swinging ball ie. warner, hughes and LBW candidate watson. In saying this, if warner gets away, he could create some carnage on the small english grounds.
I actually think, the new young crop of bowlers will equip themselves well because they all can swing the ball instead of being a one dimensional "banging it in bowler"

[Manormanic]

Or Usman

if they want to prove that Quiney was a true sacrificial lamb, yes...

[Manormanic]

I actually think, the new young crop of bowlers will equip themselves well because they all can swing the ball instead of being a one dimensional "banging it in bowler"

until they break down in teh second innings and take six weeks out!

[charlie15]

I think the performance in India in the New Year will be an interesting bellweather...

This series is going to be very interesting as I don't see Australia having the attack that England had to take 20 wickets in a test in India.  I don't think they'll have an issue getting he runs, but can Lyons plus one other do the job that Swann and Panesar did for us, and can one of Siddle, Hilfenhuas, Starc, Cummins, Johnson et al a) stay fit long enough and b) get the ball to reverse ala Jimmy?

[Manormanic]

Yet again the Aussies will be looking to enjoy our sloppy seconds! 

[Tail Ender]

As much as we've come along since the debacle of 2010/11, I think we're still a little short of being at England's level.

Interesting among the talk of Australia's bowling and Phil Hughes that it hasn't been noted how much Hughes and Mitch Starc have blossomed after their recent season in county cricket. Hughes rebuilt his technique and has scored runs for fun, and looks a lot more assured. I saw him make 74 for Adelaide against Perth in the Big Bash and he was superb. If he keeps his confidence he can be as good as he wants to be. And Starc ripped it up for Yorkshire. He should do well in the England series.

As for Quiney, much as I like him, he was given cheap caps and shouldn't have been selected. His domestic one-day form leading up was awesome, but he'd only scored 78 runs in four or five Shield innings. So he was picked on his limited overs form, and the 86 he scored against SA in the tour match. He should've played one-day cricket for Australia already (he's a monster in the short game and has been for a few years), but he should never have played a single test.