Ashes 2005 Aus FIVE (5) - England ZERO (0) nought ..zilch..nada

[The Great DonTalon]

what says ye ?

[Rachael]

I reckon the "England ZERO (0) nought ..zilch..nada" might be right.. but I'm not so sure about the "Aus FIVE (5)": with any luck the beggars will struggle to roll us over quickly enough to be THAT emphatic. I'd settle for a 2-0 or 3-0 drubbing myself... signs that we can compete would be more than enough against a team that really is just plain awesome.

Key questions:

{i} Who's going to be fit to bowl? From the England point of view, any problem with Harmison and we're probably going to get stuffed. We'd also struggle to replace Giles or Hoggard at the moment.. and fielding a side without Flintoff would have pretty radical implications for our batting, bowling or both. Equally.. I'm not sure the Aussies could really expect total dominance without Warne, McGrath, Gillespie and Kasprowicz ALL playing. Take 2 out of that lot and we'll be on similar terms.

{ii} What sort of pitches are we going to produce? Anything on which batsmen can flourish should see a draw likely but the Aussies in the driving seat: England simply aren't in the same ballpark when it comes to depth of strokeplaying.. and (perhaps more importantly) don't have as much control with the ball on flat wickets. Tests on pitches with something in them for the likes of Hoggard, Anderson and Kasprowicz? Who knows: McGrath and Gillespie will LOVE such pitches.. but so will Harmison... and I reckon (with all due respect to Katich) more English bats than Aussie bats are happy playing "survival".

It doesn't strike me as impossible for England to WIN the forthcoming series.. but I think it HAS to be with sensible use of home advantage (genuine English wickets on which you'd look to the likes of Richardson, Kirsten, Atherton, Thorpe, S. Waugh, Dravid Chanderpaul and Katich before you'd look to Hayden, Gilchrist, Gibbs, Sehwag, Flintoff, Symonds, Clarke and Jayasuria).

Then again... a winter's a long time in this game.. and if the tour of SA goes well (and ither S. Jones and J. Anderson start setting the world alight) the above might all be far, far too pessimistic.

[Occasional Fan]

Originally Posted by Rachael

Then again... a winter's a long time in this game.. and if the tour of SA goes well the above might all be far, far too pessimistic.

I think SA is crucial in the run up to next summer, Rachael, and if we come through that one on top the spirit in the team is going to be so high that the Aussies could really get a competition from England. There's no chance of a whitewash by either side in The 2005 Ashes series - it didn't happen in Australia two years ago and the gap between the teams was much wider then - and, although I wouldn't stake the entire family fortunes on an England series win, I will have a few quid on it (and that should put the mockers on the whole exercise, of course). I shall be surprised and very disappointed if we don't take at least one or two games off the Aussies next summer.

[Teatime FatCat]

Don't agree with the 5 bit or the 0 bit. Whilst not going the full 'Ernest' (apologies Ern, good for you - but I can't quite match your level of optimism), I think it'll be closer than the convicts think.

I think it'll be 2-1 or possibly even 3-2. I really think we'll compete, and I think the gap is as close as it's been in the last 20 years.

However, I'd like to see us dick SA first, then maybe I'll agree with 'The Ernimator'

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Occasional Fan

I think SA is crucial in the run up to next summer, Rachael, and if we come through that one on top the spirit in the team is going to be so high that the Aussies could really get a competition from England. {...} I shall be surprised and very disappointed if we don't take at least one or two games off the Aussies next summer.

Quite possible... but perhaps not probable. Given that winning in India is a far, far tougher prospect for the Aussies (and the conditions suit the Aussies less) and that the Aussies are currently 1-0 up with 2 to play.... and also the great record of them raising their game when it matters (something to do with having XI players on the pitch CAPABLE of really raising their game).. I'd settle for three "not losts" (of ANY description).

My biggest fear is that recent trands in team selection and balance are actually playing into Aussie hands: we're losing grittier batsmen like Hussain (and possibly Butcher) who have learnt to lead the struggle when times get tough... in favour of guys raised on superb batting tracks (Strauss from Middlesex and Key from Kent)... we're consistently promoting Flintoff to 6 (irrespective of surface)... and now we have Jones as a poor man's Gilchristat 7. Thorpe excepted there's arguably more grit in the 8 and 9 than in the top order these days!

Can England get away with Tresco not moving his feet, Key playing around the front pad, Vaughan obsessing about being the next Viv Richards rather than the next Atherton and both Flintoff and Jones looking to score at almost a run a ball? It's been working against lesser opposition.. but we're talking four outstanding Test bowlers here - guys who are taking apart the likes of Sehwag, Dravid and Laxman for fun even in subcontinental conditions.

Neither Anderson nor Jones look up to delivering as a 5th bowler right now.. but if that changes over the winter then maybe we can win more than the odd session in the field. A big "but", that.. and without it we're seriously short on bowling match-winners. If that does NOT happen I reckon we'd do as well putting Bell in at six to stiffen up the batting, push the others down one... and look to sneak a victory amid a flurry of high scoring draws: worth a shot.

[Teatime FatCat]

Hmmm,

Fair point Rach, however, I'd suggest that Australia would almost certainly have lost the most recent test had the weather not intervened, and that they were taken apart by a big hitting hyper-aggressive batter in Sehwag. Also that McGrath didn't take a wicket in the match and there was a vast over-reliance on Warne, where even Aussie commentators said he was overbowled.

Your right, they are better than us in every department, but we have it all to play for, and if we raise our game, we'll give them a fright!

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Teatime FatCat

You['re] right, they are better than us in every department, but we have it all to play for, and if we raise our game, we'll give them a fright!

The key thing, for me, is that they give themselves getting on for XI excelent shots at producing matchwinning performances... whereas we give ourselves very few.

It's surely too early to tell if Langer vs Strauss is a reasonable match-up: Strauss has started well... but Langer's standards are reasonably high (and he's stacks of experience). In truth, though, both come across as types from whom you should seek reliability rather than matchwinning knocks: to be valued at perhaps half a matchwinner on each side. By contrast, Hayden vs. Tresco might be an even match in terms of consistency... but in terms of matchwinning it strikes me as no contest at all: one matchwinner vs. half a matchwinner... and for all my admiration of Butcher... he's no Ponting - same result as Hayden vs. Tresco.

Vaughan and Thorpe vs. Katich and Martyn is complicated because Katich is new and doing very well in the Thorpe mould but whilst Vaughan has in the past done exceptionally well.. he's currently less convincing than Martyn. Reasonably even-stevens.. That leaves Lehman OR Clarke vs Flintoff: if Flintoff's form continues then that's perhaps pretty even.. and a matchwinner a side. Mind you.. if Clarke gets the nod and really IS as stunning as we're hearing then no matter WHICH England player we offer up against him that's another contest we're set to lose.

Gilchrist vs Jones? Mmmm. Less said the better. Warne vs. Giles? Mmmm. Ditto. The best you could say is that Giles + Flintoff is (in terms of bowling) is a combination that does, together, give us something of Warne's control (if not his unplayable stuff). Gillespie vs. Hoggard? Mmmmm. I'm a Hoggard-enthusiast.. but that's only going to look like a fair contest if the conditions are absolutely right for Hoggard: one matchwinner vs. half a matchwinner. Harmison vs. McGrath then gives us matchwinner a side.. but the whole thing falls apart again on Kasprowicz vs. Jones / Anderson.

Where does that leave us? Needing 1-2 batsmen extra to match their batting line up (might look even if we had Bell at six (competing with Lehman / Clarke), Flintoff at 7 (competing with Gilchrist) and then Jones at 8 to try and make up for the shortfall in those two contests and in Tresco vs. Hayden and Butcher vs. Ponting... but that's about how short of the Aussies we look to me.

Bowling? Time to pray, I reckon: we need Harmison fit and in form.. plus some sort of miraculous turn-around in either Anderson or Jones. Trouble is.. if we play Anderson / Jones we can't play an extra batsman.. so we'll almost even up the bowling and then lose the batting. Can't win.

[Statto]

Rachael the Aussie wicketkeeper is Gilchrist, not Gillespie as you seem to mention in every post.

[R W S]

Im with Big Ernie on this - England will win (just).

[Occasional Fan]

Can't argue with any of that, Rachael - but no-one said it was going to be easy! You're quite right that the Australians know how to raise their game when they need to. They've proved it several times - though I'm not sure they really raised it far enough in Chennai last week, where I think it was the rain that saved them rather than their own play. England are definitely going to need to raise their performance from the first session at Lord's AND keep it up there all through the series. It's going to need a feat of concentration which we haven't seen for a few years, but I am confident that Vaughan's team has the ability to focus: they just need actually to use that ability.

One step at a time: roll over the South Africans first (also not easy, I know), then take the Aussies session by session and the prize is within reach. Like TTFC, I can't quite bring myself to the certainty of belief which our mate, Ernest, has, but I also can't quite get as pessimistic as you. I actually think we might tie the series next summer, setting things up for a splendid return to the natural order of things when England go to Australia in 2006/7.