How far short are England (batting)?

[Rachael]

We've had enough polls on this site to establish that most of us see the Aussies as firm favourites for the Ashes (even if we differ on just how far behind England might be). Question is.. how short are England of being genuine equals?

My own feeling is that pretty well any of the England side could just about hold there own in a side that WAS the equal of the Aussies... but in much the same way that any of Carragher, Bridge, Butt, Phil Neville, Alan Smith and Owen Hargreaves are all capable of holding their own in an England football side: all eminently respectable.. but put a team of them together and it doesn't really inspire confidence.

How much short of the Aussies are England with the bat? A single man? Two men? Not easy to say now that question marks exist over Hayden (arguably, at his best, better than ANY English batsman, but clearly not at his best right now). Complicated further by uncertainty about Clarke. I'd suggest the following though:

Stauss   -   Langer       = parity likely, Langer more proven
Tresco   -   Hayden       = 10-20 runs to Aus if both are on form.. but parity more likely
??????   -   Ponting      = probable 10-20 to Aus no matter who plays
Vaughan  -   Martyn       = 10+ runs to Aus unless Vaughan has another purple patch (then parity)
Thorpe   -   Clarke       = parity likely, Thorpe more proven
Flintoff -   Gilchrist    = probable 10-20 to Aus unless Flintoff reaches new level
Jones    -   Katich       = probable 20+ runs to Aus (better chance with Prior?)
Giles    -   Warne        = potential parity

On an optimistic reading I reckon that puts England about one man shy...

[Andy Mellon]

I don't agree with your Thorpe - Clarke assessment and also, its quite dangerous to compare player to player as it depends who you compare as to what the result would be. For example, Flintoff vs Gilchrist is likely to be a narrow victory to Gilchrist whereas GO Jones vs Gilchrist would be a large victory to Gilchrist. Also, I would venture that Katich would score considerably more that the inimitable Geraint.

A better comparison might be to add together the first class averages for each of the players in English conditions.

Anyway, Thorpe vs Clarke has to be advantage to Thorpe. Clarke is unproven at the moment and off form - in fact, I wouldn't be that surprised if Clarke didn't start the 1st test - unless warm up matches show him to be in form.

[Milo]

To seriously match the Australians we are short of one opener (Trescothick will be OK but we need him to score 450 runs in the series which he won't), and we are short of the current number 3 player. As concluded on here a couple of months back, Vaughan should bat at 3, but we would still be shy on the third middle order position.

Players may have good or bad series, but all in all, I am totally happy with Strauss, Vaughan and Thorpe, concerned about Trescothick and Flintoff (at 6) and very worried about the other player. I cannot see any debutant (or near debutant) scoring heavily against this Australian side and Butcher and Key would be short of the mark.

We must build partnerships. That is the problem. I have no doubt in my mind that all batsmen will score runs at some time in the series, but I feel that scores of 400 will be very rare.

The standard we need to match this Australian team would need to be Gooch, Strauss, Gower, Vaughan, Thorpe and Smith. We are not there. 3 short.

[DaveGillespie]

Strauss - History suggests he will be found out.

Tresco - Has been considerably less of a thoughtless dasher in the last 12 months, and has rediscovered his off stump (previously thought to be MIA). Also has a major point to prove - will either get a couple of centuries in the series or bugger all squared. Very much all or nothing, so expect nothing.

Vaughan - Can't see him doing badly.

Thorpe - Almost certainly his last hurrah, expected to do well.

Flintoff - As with Tresco, will either cuff the aussies all round the park or will be badly exposed outside off.

Jones - No chance. Just hope he proves me wrong. I would expect either a couple of half centuries or a single century and no other scores beyond 10.

Giles - Should be good for a 19-24 average, which will be a fair bit better than Warne. Warne is really a #9 in tests, whereas Gilo is really a #8.

Key - Make or break time. Again, expect nothing.


By my reckoning, Vaughan and Thorpe are the only players anything should be expected from. Having said that, all of Key (prone to giving it away), Trescothick (weak outside off), Strauss & Flintoff (not tested against the Convicts) and Jones (ooh crikey, theres Matt Prior) all have points to prove. I would be disappointed if all 5 failed completely. Quite a way short in batting, by my estimation.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

I think on flatish wickets, we'll do enough. Although england wont put on 450-500 scores on the board too often, I cant see us being blasted too many times for sub 150 scores either, regardless of who fires. As long as we bat carefully and try to whack everything just outside off (like we did when we played the saffers) we'll should be OK against the pace corps. Warne, apart form thorpe, tresco and KP (if selected) we might struggle a bit.

Can we take 20 aussie wickets per test match ??? Different matter entirly....

[Trescothick]

I don't think we're significantly far behind at all... I think we can expect the following from the England batsmen

Tresco - He should hit a couple or more centurys, have a couple or more poor scores and get some nice scores as well... Overall should average at least 50. He will be more confident this was round with his imrpoved score on England turf. Will beat Hayden as i think Haydens poor form will continue: Eng + 1

Strauss - I think this series could be another big one for him, i just want him to get some good consistent high scored and make some good partnerships with Tresco to get us started. Will draw with Langer hopefully. Equal

Vaughan - Its very difficult to judge but i think he should do well this time round. He will get quite a few half-centurys, prob not any centurys but will fall behind Martyn a lil bit. Aus + 1

Pietersen - I think he can come up trumps and make Englands scores something BIG for Australia to chase. I think he will at least be on par with Ponting. Equal

Thorpe - His last Ashes, lets hope he makes it a big one, this one can go either way, so again i'm gonna say Equal.

Jones - My prediction is this is going to be a very good Ashes for Jones on the bat and as a wicketkeeper.. People don't thinkl much of him, but i think whe will do a very good job at no 6. He will equal Katich. Equal.

Flintoff - Again, maybe too much pressure is put on him, but i feel he can make a massive performace overall in the tests mainly on the ball, with the bat he will make some good scores as well.. But Equal

Giles - I am a big fan of Giles on the bat and i feel he makes valuable contributions when needed. I think he can out do Warne easily. Eng + 1

However we will fall behind with the three tailenders: Hoggard, Harmison and Jones or Anderson. So this could cripple us, i just hope the Aussie tailenders don't cause too much trouble, bt Aus + 1

So, overall i think we will be around equal, depending very much on performances. I think one of the Aussie batters will ahve an off-series who hasn't previously for awhile and England could get teh edge, unless of course one of our batsmen do as well..

Close to call

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Andy Mellon

Thorpe vs Clarke has to be advantage to Thorpe.

I paired players position for position.. but the obvious comparisons are Langer-Thorpe (slight edge to Langer as both are dependable but Langer is more likely to play a matchwinning knock)... and Strauss-Clarke (slight edge to Strauss on form, perhaps a slight edge to Clarke on class: a pair of relative newbies).

Originally Posted by Milo 44822

To seriously match the Australians we are short of one opener (Trescothick will be OK but we need him to score 450 runs in the series which he won't), and we are short of the current number 3 player. As concluded on here a couple of months back, Vaughan should bat at 3, but we would still be shy on the third middle order position.

The standard we need to match this Australian team would need to be Gooch, Strauss, Gower, Vaughan, Thorpe and Smith. We are not there. 3 short.

That's a fair assessment... but I guess I'm saying that to match the Aussies WITH our current players (i.e. WITH Tresco, Strauss, <no 3>, Vaughan, Thorpe, Flintoff, Jones and Giles) we'd also need at least one other specialist bat (perhaps Bell at 6 or 7) AND some more batting lower down - impractical, I know.. but I think that's about the scale of the deficit.

[Richie Benauds Love Child]

Rachael and Milo in agreement ???????????????

HAS THE WORLD GONE MAD !?!?!?!?!?

[Paoli]

Originally Posted by RBLC

Rachael and Milo in Agreement there???

HAS THE WORLD GONE MAD

Yes

Moving right along, Fair assesments from both Dizzy and Tresco there, however I would like to state my case which differs from Dizzy's and Tresco's. Andrew Strauss reminds me alot of Justin Langer. Only difference is Strauss has a few more shots than JL and is an ODI player as well. Think of the success Langer has had. I'm sure he'll be a valuable player for England if he can sustain his success.

Vaughan, I believe is the key. Only proven performer vs. Australia in the current side and is sure to have some impact if on song---if not, just about good night England from a batting point of view.

Then of course, there is the mercurial Kevin Pietersen. "Too on-side, too bottom hand, only proven against one side" is what I am hearing. Gotta take a risk though, chuck KP in, probably the missing link in the chain.

[Milo]

Thorpe is a proven performer against the Australians. In fact, his century at Perth was one of the best innings seen by a tourist in Australia in the last 15 years.