Print

[awp]

Just like Stokes then?

He has come in and hasn't been "monstered".

This Aussie attack isn't "that good". They all have qualities and play their own part well, but it's not like facing McGrath/Warne etc or the Windies of the 80s.

They are a good bowling unit, and have bowled much better than the English, but will not be remembered as one of the great bowling attacks.

Stokes was fantastic, really enjoyed his innings.  What I mean is a 'batsman' into the top 4 or 5, not an allrounder.  i think you'll find Stokes is taken more seriously now and that a fair bit of time will be spent on planning for him.  After Adeliade, i think the aussies thought as i did; just another pom that looks good playing from the crease, nice n tidy, but cant really bat, bang a few in, then a full wide one, and see you later, which seemed the case in Adelaide.  He's better than that, a whole lot better than that.  Lets see how he goes in the next 2 tests before pronouncing him the next Botham.  I hope he does well, a genuine allrounder is a rare thing.

What I was meaning is that if you bring in compton, balance, that midget whose name i forget, then they will get pulverised and be the next bloke on the plane home with 'issues'. 

This attack is a whole lot better that you poms all keep saying.  either youre bitter (which is understandable) or really dont know much about cricket (which is likely based on the comments on here)  I think many of you should stick to looking at the pretty bat pictures.

[Johnny]

To be fair awp I'm not sure about those NB stickers

[skip1973]

Stokes batted well but we over attacked with him. KP is Englands biggest problem, talented but such a selfish sook, surely he couldn't be trusted inside the dressing room?

How good was it to see the back of the stupid rotation system.

[Mtown Don]

Stokes was fantastic, really enjoyed his innings.  What I mean is a 'batsman' into the top 4 or 5, not an allrounder.  i think you'll find Stokes is taken more seriously now and that a fair bit of time will be spent on planning for him.  After Adeliade, i think the aussies thought as i did; just another pom that looks good playing from the crease, nice n tidy, but cant really bat, bang a few in, then a full wide one, and see you later, which seemed the case in Adelaide.  He's better than that, a whole lot better than that.  Lets see how he goes in the next 2 tests before pronouncing him the next Botham.  I hope he does well, a genuine allrounder is a rare thing.

What I was meaning is that if you bring in compton, balance, that midget whose name i forget, then they will get pulverised and be the next bloke on the plane home with 'issues'. 

This attack is a whole lot better that you poms all keep saying.  either youre bitter (which is understandable) or really dont know much about cricket (which is likely based on the comments on here)  I think many of you should stick to looking at the pretty bat pictures.

Not saying that the Australian attack isn't good at all; they've been excellent so far. However, I think people are provoked by your suggestion that they have 'monstered' the English batsmen. Only Trott, who had a clear pre-existing deficiency against the short ball (setting aside whether or not he was affected by personal issues), has been 'worked over' in the England top order to the extent you're making out. Not sure any of the backup batsmen England have would be blown away like you suggest (whether or not they make telling runs out of starts is a different story judging from performances so far), Stokes being a good example.

Not a lot of single figure scores for a betting lineup that's being 'monstered'...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Manormanic]

This attack is a whole lot better that you poms all keep saying.  either youre bitter (which is understandable) or really dont know much about cricket (which is likely based on the comments on here)  I think many of you should stick to looking at the pretty bat pictures.

Oh dear, troll alert.   

[Sam]

This attack is a whole lot better that you poms all keep saying.  either youre bitter (which is understandable) or really dont know much about cricket (which is likely based on the comments on here)  I think many of you should stick to looking at the pretty bat pictures.

Wait, you really just claimed this attack is nearly as good as the one in and before 2005  . I think you're the one that needs to stick to pretty bat pictures mate!

[Manormanic]

Wait, you really just claimed this attack is nearly as good as the one in and before 2005  . I think you're the one that needs to stick to pretty bat pictures mate!

Now now Sam.   know you're thinking that:

Harris is not on the level of McGrath
Johnson is at best equal to Lee
Siddle is in no way fit to hold Dizzy's headband
Lyon....oh feck it I am NOT going there....

But that is only four nil.  Meanwhile...

Watson might edge Ponting as a fourth seamer
Smith vs Katich is close but Smith possibly just shades it
Warner is marginally less of a pie chucker than Martyn
Bailey might be a bit better than Langer
Rodgers is a useful net bowler to the tailenders and Hayden thought that beneath him

So, given that wicketkeepers can't be brought into it and Clarke was in both sides, its arguably five four to the current lot!!!

[joeljonno]

Now now Sam.   know you're thinking that:

Harris is not on the level of McGrath
Johnson is at best equal to Lee
Siddle is in no way fit to hold Dizzy's headband
Lyon....oh feck it I am NOT going there....

But that is only four nil.  Meanwhile...

Watson might edge Ponting as a fourth seamer
Smith vs Katich is close but Smith possibly just shades it
Warner is marginally less of a pie chucker than Martyn
Bailey might be a bit better than Langer
Rodgers is a useful net bowler to the tailenders and Hayden thought that beneath him

So, given that wicketkeepers can't be brought into it and Clarke was in both sides, its arguably five four to the current lot!!!

I think the best ever ICC rating is a good yard stick.

McGrath is at 5, Warne at 16, Johnson at 68, Siddle at 71, then Lee, Gillespie and Harris are all between 71 and 88

So, what it shows is that this current attack,might have got into the 3/4 bowler slot. Stuart Clark is up in the numbers, fair bit higher than Johnson.

However, with McGrath and Warne in your team, you will only have slim pickings anyway, unlike Johnson and Harris who have all 10 wickets a chance of getting.

[Alvaro]

Langer
Hayden
Ponting
Clarke
Martyn
Watson
Gilchrist
McGrath
Gillespie
Harris
Warne

That would do as a composite XI

[Manormanic]

Langer
Hayden
Ponting
Clarke
Martyn
Watson
Gilchrist
McGrath
Gillespie
Harris
Warne

That would do as a composite XI

Depends when you compare - if its the actual 2005 Ashes Gillespie would go for Lee.  If its career then Harris would - you simply don' need Harris if you have a fit firing Dizzy getting it down at 90.

In any event, who really thinks Watto would make the side?  Surely Warner from the current vintage or Haddin as a batsman!!!

[Manormanic]

Composite England side is trickier but, based on overall performance and in Australian conditions I would have:

Trescothick
Cook/Strauss
Vaughan
Pietersen (of 2005)
Bell (of 2013)
Flintoff
Prior
Swann
Broad/Hoggard
Harmison
Jones

Tough to select Prior and Swann on this series but overall they top Jones and Giles.   Hoggard vs Broad for the third seamers slot is tough - for me Hoggard gets it because he liked the hard yards whereas Broad would have been the fourth choice big cheese.

[Alvaro]

I'd have Watson to make hay at six and to bowl a few overs. I think Harris is a top bowler and Gillespie wore a headband. Lee was an odi bowler with connections.

I'm English too, so would secretly want them to win anyway.

[Manormanic]

I'd have Watson to make hay at six and to bowl a few overs. I think Harris is a top bowler and Gillespie wore a headband. Lee was an odi bowler with connections.

You have Warne and Pidge, you don't need a few overs fiddling!

[Alvaro]

If you're a Roblinda Youtube junkie like me you'd be surprised the number of times key wickets were taken by people like Greg Blewett, Mark Waugh, Steve Waugh, Simon Katich and even Martyn and Ponting.

you always like to have that fifth bowler whether you have world beaters or not.

[Manormanic]

If you're a Roblinda Youtube junkie like me you'd be surprised the number of times key wickets were taken by people like Greg Blewett, Mark Waugh, Steve Waugh, Simon Katich and even Martyn and Ponting.

you always like to have that fifth bowler whether you have world beaters or not.

Thing is none of those guys was picked over a better batsman on account of their ability to fiddle a few overs.  Therefore, Warner being a better bat than Watson, he gets in an, should overs need to be fiddled, Warner' leggies, Clarke's slow leftarm and Punter's pies would more than suffice.