Print

[400notout]

Have been reading a few articles recently and would like to know on either side who we reckon is the best XI the aussies can produce for the Ashes. Apologies if this has been done before, finally at the end of the post, put wether you are English/British or Australian, just out of curiosity to see if the English/Aussies really dislike someone!

1. C. Rogers
2. E. Cowan
3. S. Marsh
4. P. Hughes
5. M. Clarke
6. C. Hartley
7. L. Butterworth
8. M. Starc
9. P. Siddle
10. J. Pattinson
11. J. Holland (Is he fit?)

If Holland isn't fit, I'd be taking Steve O'Keefe and moving him in around 7/8?

[Binsy]

Think you're very optimistic with that line up! Off the top of my head, I think you've added 5 players who weren't even in the squad for India and a few that haven't even been awarded a CA contract. Given that it's only 3 months til the first Test and the Australian domestic season is over and all we have now is IPL, I don't see many of your new faces breaking into the squad. Of them Rogers seems the most likely given his form in England over the years, but if he is going to take any openers' spot it would be Cowan rather than Warner.

For what it's worth, I would imagine it will look something like:

1. D Warner
2. E Cowan
3. P Hughes
4. M Clarke
5. S Watson
6. A Voges / C Rogers / S Marsh
7. M Wade
8. M Starc
9. J Pattinson
10. P Siddle
11. N Lyon.

Only real uncertainty is the number 6 spot. And I'm from England, if you hadn't guessed 

[vividgreen]

You can look at this a number of ways given that the Aussie's are abit shallow in the batting department. My line up would be;

1. Cowan
2. Warner
3. Hughes
4. Clarke
5. Bailey (for maturity and stability - ideal Hussey replacement) or Khwaja
6. Watson (geniune allrounders role - wreak havoc batting against the older ball or 2nd new ball similar to Gilchrist)
7. Wade or Haddin (similar value to the team)
8. Starc
9. Pattinson
10. Siddle
11. Lyon
12. Bird ( i rate this guy - the next McGrath )

My bolter will be Rogers as an opener if they get desperate for stability. Would like to also see Marsh in there as another option at No 5.
I'm from the land down under.....

[The_Bird]

Henriques has made a good argument to play surely, he offers them so many options. Got decent shield runs as well as runs in India which were very hard to come by.

I'd take a punt on one of Ferguson/Burns/Maddinson At 6 and I also think Watson will open.

Watson
Warner
Cowan
Hughes
Clarke
Ferguson/Burns/Maddinson/Henriques
Wade/Haddin
Starc
Pattinson
Siddle
Lyon

[vividgreen]

Henriques has made a good argument to play surely, he offers them so many options. Got decent shield runs as well as runs in India which were very hard to come by.

I'd take a punt on one of Ferguson/Burns/Maddinson At 6 and I also think Watson will open.

Watson
Warner
Cowan
Hughes
Clarke
Ferguson/Burns/Maddinson/Henriques
Wade/Haddin
Starc
Pattinson
Siddle
Lyon

I like the look of that line up even though i don't think Watson should open - too attacking as per warner.
In saying this, if you had Watson to open it drops Cowan to 3 which would be ideal for stability. This drops the aggressive Hughes to 4 which would be ideal and Clarke slots back to his preferred 5. At 6 i still think either Bailey or Khwaja, then the rest as per discussed.

[Buzz]

I agree, although that would rely on the Aussie selectors actually looking at their resourses and doing something sensible - like picking the best available team. Clarke should probably be at 4. I still think Hughes is terrible, however this is a much more attacking team than the England team where the balance of blockers and hitters is wrong.

Watson
Warner
Cowan
Clarke
Hughes
Henriques
Wade
Starc
Pattinson
Siddle
Lyon

[Binsy]

however this is a much more attacking team than the England team where the balance of blockers and hitters is wrong.

Care to expand on that? A 5,6,7 of Bell, Root and Prior is superior to Hughes, Henriques and Root which ever way you look at it. While the Aussie side is aggressive, a Test is played over 5 days. I'd quite happily hav Compton, Cook and Trott see off the new ball and get to 250 for 1 at close of play then see Warner flash his way to 20/30 and then watch the procession of Aussie wickets fall.

[vividgreen]

I agree, although that would rely on the Aussie selectors actually looking at their resourses and doing something sensible - like picking the best available team. Clarke should probably be at 4. I still think Hughes is terrible, however this is a much more attacking team than the England team where the balance of blockers and hitters is wrong.

Watson
Warner
Cowan
Clarke
Hughes
Henriques
Wade
Starc
Pattinson
Siddle
Lyon

I think your selection of Henriques at 6 is only feasible if Watson bats only. If he bowls as well, no need for another allrounder, so i would go with a specialist batsman, someone who knows his game (experience). Besides that, i think the rest are good

[Buzz]

Care to expand on that? A 5,6,7 of Bell, Root and Prior is superior to Hughes, Henriques and Root which ever way you look at it. While the Aussie side is aggressive, a Test is played over 5 days. I'd quite happily hav Compton, Cook and Trott see off the new ball and get to 250 for 1 at close of play then see Warner flash his way to 20/30 and then watch the procession of Aussie wickets fall.

No problem. If you look at all the great teams they have a combination of attacking and defensive players in the line up. Especially if you look at the three truely great teams
Aus post 2nd world war (the invincibles) 1948 especially
WI in the 80's
Aus in the late 90's/2000's

we see a combination of hard hitting stroke players at the top of the order and batsmen who bat time to balance them (we wont even mention the players who came after the top three, Millar, Hassett, Clive Lloyd, Mark Waugh, Steve Waugh etc...)

Barnes, Morris, Bradman
Grenidge, Haynes, Richards
Haydon or Slater with Langer or Taylor then Ponting at 3

Even the second tier of just very good teams we see the 2005 Eng team had
Trescothic, Strauss, Vaughan.
the Indian late 2000's team of:
Sehwag, Gambhir and Dravid

there is always at least one attacking opening bat and then complementing players around them.

We currently have a top three of
Cook, Compton and Trott, who hardly get the ball of the square - which means there is too much pressure on the likes of KP and Bell to take the game away from the oposition - even if they come in at 150-2 it will be just before tea and they will have to get their eye in - then go off for tea then come back, get their eye in and face the second new ball. We really are not helping ourselves.

My regularly stated view is that if we want to really challenge we need to ask the question of is there a way we can rebalance the order?
Should we think about Bell opening or KP at three. Yes. Manormanic would say that is his worst nightmare - but I can think of many worse scenarios. one of which is the current line up.

Would you not think a line up of
Cook
Bell
Pieterson
Trott
Bairstow
Root/Compton
Prior

would look a better bet for putting pressure on the opposition early on? if it was 12-2 seeing trott walking out is far more reasurring that seeing KP walk out. if it was 210 for 2 just before tea and you then had trott walking out to bat the bowlers would want to kill themselves. This wouldn't happen with the current line up.

[Vic Nicholas]

You can line them up anyway you want...this series is a fore gone conclusion.

Australia's bowlers will scythe through the English batting line up in favourable conditions giving the Aussies the sniff, only for the Aussie batsmen to meekly crumble time and time again with only Clarke standing up on any regular basis.

It is going to get ugly my friends, very ugly.

I pray for a close, hard fought series, but I am not optimistic.

[Buzz]

Australia's bowlers will scythe through the English batting line up in favourable conditions

I don't see the conditions being all that favourable for the Aussie bowlers or see them scything through our batting. But that is just my view.

[dhackett89]

Don't for a minute think it will happen but surely the Aussies need guys who have done it week in week out in England

1. Rogers
2. Warner
3. Hughes
4. Clarke
5. Watson
6. Hodge/ Voges
7. Haddon
8. Siddle
9. Starc
10. Pattinson
11. Johnson

Batting order of the tail is all wrong as I was going to play a spinner but if you had hodge and Clarke they would do about as good a job as Lyon.

[fros23]

No mention of Steve Smith so far, Aussies best bat after Clarke in India surely?

My View:

Cowan
Warner
Watson
Clarke
Khawaja
Smith
Paine
O'Keefe/Lyon
Siddle
Harris
Pattinson

Don't rate Hughes at all at the moment, I think Bailey mustered one Shield fifty all season so no room for him.  Marsh got destroyed by Indian seamers in Aus which is pretty embarassing plus he seems to cause plenty of trouble.
Smith was Australia best bat after Clarke in India so he gets first go at 6 and Khawaja was supposedly the second coming of bradman after his 30 in the Ashes so lets see what he's got.
I keep hearing how O'keefe is the best spinner around in Aus although I havent seen him so he is in.  Siddle is the best seamer they have provided he pitches it up and doesnt do a Broad enforcer role!  Harris provided he is fit is still ahead of Starc who is a bit wayward but does provide variety.  Pattinson is quick and talented but made of biscuits so I don't expect him to play all 5 tests.  Plus all of the bowlers can bat a bit whihc will help when the top order fails.
Don't rate Wade or Haddin so if Paine is fit then I want to see what the hype of a few years ago was all about.

As an englishman I would quite like to see the following XI:

Warner
Hughes
Watson
Clarke
Henriques
Wade
Maxwell
Johnson
Starc
Siddle
Doherty/Lyon

Plenty of mediocre players in there 

[400notout]

I stated in my post who I reckoned the Best XI the aussies could muster.

I agree, that the only likely change will be Rogers, but thats the XI out of Australia that are still available for Tests that I feel is their best team.

[Manormanic]

My regularly stated view is that if we want to really challenge we need to ask the question of is there a way we can rebalance the order?
Should we think about Bell opening or KP at three. Yes. Manormanic would say that is his worst nightmare - but I can think of many worse scenarios. one of which is the current line up.

Would you not think a line up of
Cook
Bell
Pieterson
Trott
Bairstow
Root/Compton
Prior

would look a better bet for putting pressure on the opposition early on? if it was 12-2 seeing trott walking out is far more reasurring that seeing KP walk out. if it was 210 for 2 just before tea and you then had trott walking out to bat the bowlers would want to kill themselves. This wouldn't happen with the current line up.

I don't agree with everything you've said but I do agree that there is a certain logic to avoiding, where possible, the dangers inherent in a one paced line up, which England do kind of have with Cook, Compton and Trott in the first three spots.  There might be days when the ability to grind out two sessions at who cares how few an over is a positive, but tehse are few and far between and, for the most part, mopre aggressive players can make the adjustment down more easily than Brigadeer Block types can press the accelerator.

But...firstly, I really would not want to have KP at three.  The point about Trott walking in at 12-2 is valid, but I reckon most of the times when that happened would be because KP walked in at 12-1 not fully engaged and, looking at your scoreboard point in reverse, the opposition would be far more likely to want to kill themselves if they were about to face a fired up Pietersen looking to remind the crowd that it was him they paid to see Goddammit....

This argument does make Nick Compton look vulnerable.  I don't have a problem with this - you all know I was not sure of him before New Zealand and I remain unsure now, for all that he made a couple of easy flat deck tons; the question is who would replace him because I do not at this stage share your perception that Root is capable of dashing the ball around, am certainly not keen on the idea of Bell doing it (even ifit does free up a spot for young Bluey) and do not see an obvious candidate in the first class game, unless Hales has a really stellar year in 2013.