Assuming the Ashes are regained by the Aussies at some point over the next three sessions... what should the two teams plan to get out of the two remaining Tests: should Australia stick with a winning formula and try and make McGrath's 5-0 prediction come true? Should England focus on consolation victories? Or should each side take the chance to rest senior players and try out fringe players?

If the latter... who gives way.. and who plays?

Under no circumstances should a team go into a test match not wanting to win whether the series is over or not, so England should be focusing on making the series 3-2 because whether the Aussies have the Ashes or not, they will not want to lose so it will be difficult for England, and winning will be a good sign for 2009, when they aren't as strong, due to retirements.

__________________
What we have been is what we are

Wanting to win is fair enough.. but even with that goal... one can play safe or gamble in terms of selection... and there's far less pressure to risk a less than 100% fit player with the series already gone.

With the series won the Aussie selectors would presumably have no hesitation in resting McGrath for one of the back-to-back Tests if they felt that would be best in terms of preparation for the ODI series and World Cup... and if there's a recurrence of his bruised-heel problem he'll surely not push it.

The fact that the ODI series and World Cup are coming up is presumably also good news for Symonds... who surely doesn't deserve another Test cap... but will probably get two Tests by way of preparation.

Knowing the ODI series and World Cup are their next objectives might also sway England on marginal decisions: Anderson is definitely going to play in the ODI series and needs overs under his belt... and the same is probably true of Harmison... but it is only a possibility for Mahmood: this has to be factored in now the series is gone.

The big question for Fletcher presumably concerns Flintoff: he needs time in the middle with the bat... but might actually benefit from 5/10 days off in terms of getting fully fit to lead the attack in the ODI series and World Cup. If he's an injury concern the medical conceerns must now trump everything.

So... some things HAVE changed.

The (presumably) 3-0 scoreline has already undermined the series as a spectacle. Fielding second string teams will only further undermine the specacle and leave the paying public feeling short changed.
Both teams must fiels full strength teams. If England rest Flintoff for example, it will only look like sour grapes, lack of courage under fire, and totally destroy what remains of his tattered reputation.
England have to try to win both tests at all costs and they can only do that by putting their best team on the field.

__________________

Does the same apply to the Aussies? Are we going to see Hayden, Symonds and Lee dropped in the interests of pursuing 5-0? On the England front... does that allow dropping the out of form Flintoff (leaden footed with the bat, hasn't bowled impresively)? If picking the "strongest team" were easy we'd not see anything like the same controvery on this baord!

I think England have shown periods of good form and they need to stay together as a unit and try and develop some consistency. If they achieve some consistency and finish the series on a positive note that will lift their morale ahead of the VB series and World Cup. Australia will field the same winning side to prevent England gaining any positives or momentum for the upcoming clashes in the VB series.

Anderson should now be rested ahead of the VB series. I can't see either side making any changes for the last two Tests although I think G Jones should be replaced by Chris Read.

Both sides should be going out there to win.Australia to rub our noses in the dirt (and rightly so) and England to regain some pride and possibly salvage some careers (Jones and Harmison).

I still expect some decent cricket from both sides and it is whether England are capable of stopping the Australian juggernaut that will make me watch so keenly.

Absolutely not - these are Test matches. Dalrymple for Mahmood should be the change - if Flintoff is, as he claims, fit. (Oh, and Read for Jones).

Now would be a good time to start the pruning.

Symonds is not up to it and should be replaced by C.White or S.Watson for Melbourne.
Langer and Hayden should both be rested for one game each to allow P.Jaques some experiance.
B.Haddon and M.Johnson should also get one game each.

Of course none of these suggestions will happen.

P.S. Steve Waugh lives in a dream world..Faith..What a load of horse crap...http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sto...9-2882,00.html

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

That's a bit hypocritical isn't it? Surely Dalrymple is more of a fringe player than Mahmood?!

I'd leave Mahmood in to be quite honest - he was under utilised in the last match IMO and deserves, if anything, the chance to bowl a decent number of overs this series. In the first innings he bowled 7 overs, at the same economy as Flintoff; and in the second bowled 10 during Gilchrist's slog at 5.9/over.

Read should play from here on, and Jones be removed from the selector's minds forever.

And as the series as a contest and spectacle is already over, I wouldn't mind seeing Australia bring in the likes of Jaques and Johnson for Hayden and Lee, let them have a bit more experience at Test level.

__________________
"Being second is to be the first of the ones who lose."
- Ayrton Senna