Over the past few years England have brought in a host of young players... with some old hands making way permanently (Stewart, Hussain, Thorpe)... some just going missing (Vaughan, Tresco, S. Jones)... and others being dropped (Butcher, Giles). The players to come in include Strauss, Bell, Pietersen, Cook, Collingwood, Read/Jones, Simon Jones and Panesar.

The Aussies have started a similar turnaround.. with Hussey, Clarke and Clark establishing themselves, Watson only missing out through injury and Johnson, Tait and Voges reaching the fringes and the likes of Jacques making stunning cases for inclusion... making a changing of the guard look far less problematic than it appeared just 18 months ago.

So... how would the following sides match up....Offer up the odd alternative player if you like (and highlight both weak areas and the reserves available as injury cover).. but in essence.... do these two sides look ready to dominate world cricket for a while?

ps. thoughts on who gives way for Simon Jones wouldn't hurt

Australia's does, but ours doesn't.

__________________
What we have been is what we are

I do not think that Read will be england's regular keeper. I think that Foster or Davies will be given a shot once the World Cup is over.

The Aussie team looks strong, but the bowling attack may be weaker. England's bowling is okay, but i think Harmy would be the most vulnerable to be replaced, or, if a suitably competent keeper-batsman is found, once again it could be colly who goes for fred to bat 6.

Young Aussie possible bowlers of the future.

Quicks
Hilpenhaus (23 yrs) RFM - Leading wicket taker in Pura cup and looks to be a very good. Ponting said that he has a long international future ahead of him.
Johnson (25 yrs) LF - Not much to say but looks the player to take the new ball for Australia in the future.
Tait (23 yrs) RF - Lightning quick slinger looks to be very good another great start to FC career 166 wickets at 26.94
Watson (25 yrs, allrounder) RFM - Watson has proven to be an international player
Moises Henriques (19 yrs, allrounder) - RMF - Only played 2 FC games 7 wickets at 14.14 is not bad.

Spinner
White (23 yrs) Legspin, allrounder/ part time bowler. Great year with the bat
Cullen Bailey (21 yrs) Legspin, having a great year for a youngster 17 wickets in 4 matches in pura cup.
Dan Cullen (22 yrs) Offspin - played one test. I don't expect much of him. Hes a right arm offspiner that doesnt throw it so he has no doosra.
Aaron Heal (23 yrs) Left arm offspin- Good first full year 16 wickets at 23.37 in Pura Cup

__________________
Bill Ponsford - The only one who could play in Bradman’s company and make it a duet.

Theres a couple of other guys you left out aswell.

Brendan Drew - 23 year old Mcgrath clone from NSW who plays for Tasmania
Alan Wise - Two metre tall left arm pacemen from Victoria who had excellent results taking 80 wickets from his 20 odd matches @ 26 before suffering from shoulder/back injuries. Still only 26 and Will hopefully make a successful return next year.
Daniel Doran - Big turning Leg spinner who plays for Queensland. Our only domestic spinner aside from Macgill with an average under 30 i believe.
Andrew McDonald - Penetrative medium pace all-rounder who's also averaging over 100 with the bat this season.

Then you have the state stalwarts like Ashley Noffke, Adam Griffith, Paul Rofe, Shane Harwood etc who would probably walk onto any other international side.

as for batsman, you have the brigade of Western Australians like Marcus North, Shaun Marsh, Luke Ronchi, Adam Voges and Chris Rogers, who will open with Phil Jacques, then Michael Klinger from Victoria, Ed Cowan from NSW, Cosgrove from SA and George Bailey, Travis Birt and Tim Paine from Tasmania who could all come into the reckoning before the next Ashes series and lets not forget Michael Hussey has a younger brother called David who averages about 70 in county cricket.

So lots to play with, and in my opinion we could field two seperate teams that would beat England, but i'm bais and don't hold the likes of Anderson, Plunkett, Mahmood in high regard, so unless England unearth some better bowlers, until then i'm pretty confident.

Ive seen Broad, he looks raw, and needs to work on his action, but could be good, and i like Chris Tremlett. But England need to discard the rubbish sooner than later.

I think over the next 12 months or so that Mahmood will be an England regular, he needs some cricket with Lancashire.

If he can put accuracy with his 90mph + bowling, and being able to swing the ball, he should be chose over Lewis Broad or Onions on the Test scene, he will never make a one day bowler.
Rachael you have not IMO picked enough bowlers, a four mane bowling attack will never win back the Ashes for England.

Flintoff at 7 is not right, in particular when he regains his fitness and form, one of the batsmen will have to go in any case.
The batting is the same weak line up that just got thrashed in Australia.

Bell has had two Ashes failures - I doubt England can afford to give him another go, with Vaughan not made a decent score in ages, and Collingwood looked looked out of his depth other than at Adelaide.
I thing the changes will have to be drastic, and if Flintoff is NOT fit, then that has to be taken into account IMO.

__________________
Ern

This thread was started early in the tour to ask how the England side that WOULD have contested the Ashes (had Vaughan and Flintoff had an extra 6 weeks recovery time) would have shaped up against an Aussie team stripped of its "old men". I don't think there's much doubt that the side I've listed is the one England could have been expected to contest the Ashes with had Vaughan and Flintoff been match fit.

I could have gone further and put Jones in for Harmison... but Jones' injury os of a different magnitude: he MAY come back as the impressive (and ever improving) bowler of 2005... but that's just speculation at present.

Sure.. by the time the next Ashes contest comes around things may be slightly different... and I'd not bet against Joyce having cemented a place at 6 ahead of the perennially unlucky Collingwood, or against Flintoff being retired from Test cricket, but that's not the point of the thread.

Now... what has evolved since I started this thread is my own sense of what Australia's side should look like without the old men... and if you had ripped out Hayden, Langer, Martyn, Gilchrist, Warne and McGrath at the start of the Ashes... and sent MacGill the same way... I now think the strongest line up would have been as follows:

Rogers
Jacques
Ponting
Hussey
Clark
Voges
Haddin
Johnson
Clark
Heal
Hilfenhaus

Stick Lee in there if you must (though only for the sake of experience as all three seamers I've included look more worthy of a Test place) and you've got a side that would have been an interesting match for England.

ps. I'm just about ready to bet that Mahmood never actually matures into a quallity Test bowler: rather like Devoin Malcolm, he'll just carry on blowing hot and cold, having far more bad days than good days, and never get the hang of bowling a 6 over spell without a 4-ball.

Malcolm had tons of talent. Given your support of players who have 'different' personalities, I'm strugging to work out why you continually criticise DM. He was ruined by disgraceful treatment from Illingworth - and could have been so much better.

Adam Crosthwaite,the 22 year old Victorian keeper/batsman has been impressive in his career so far.

__________________
" You don't want the truth,you can't handle the truth."

My personal opinion is that Australia won the Ashes 5-0 without neccesserily having played as well as they can...(the openers didn't have a particularly good series, Lee was pretty much atrocious, Gilchrist was hot and cold with the bat, & had some missed opportunities behind the stumps as well in Melbourne, Symonds only really had one big innings, though his contribution with the ball was handy and Martyn didn't have a big series by any means either)...even some one like Warne who had a reasonably good series, with 23 wickets, was arguably not at his absolute best (went for 100 plus in the first three test, and over all averaged in the 30s with the ball). Because Clarke,Clark, Ponting and Hussey were consistentyly very good, the short comings of the rest were of less significance...what I'm saying is Australia as a whole were capable of playing much better, and given four of their best six performers in the series, are still available to play in your hypothetical "Young" Aussie side, I'd say, they'd win against your selected England side pretty much with more or less the same ease. Adelaide could possibly be the only different result, since another young spinner, in place of Warne would probably struggle to have the same psychological hold over England as did Warne in that much, but I don't see how any of the other results might have been different. I'd say with the sides you've picked (even with Vaughan and Flintoff having that extra bit of time) I'd expect Australia to win either 4-0/5-0 or at worst 4-1.