The Ashes 2006-07: The Build-up

[Ernest]

If England are at full strength, or as near as possible then I don't see a draw as being possible.
I am taking it the Australia are going to be playing both McGrath and Hayden.
Lets look back into history a little at least, Atherton not known for giving his wicket away was McGraths bunny.

So back to the present if Hayden is in the side he like Atherton could well fall to the England quicks, and with respect to all Australia supporters - I said it last year, I really have to stick with what I said then, he should not IMO play in the Ashes series, he should make way for younger players.
It is not going to be easy for England, Lee one of the top 3 bowlers in the world will be a major force, if England can't play him - then England lose the Ashes.
Which brings me to two more players Warne and Bell - well Bell did well in India and against Pakistan, I think he will play Warne ok, but Lee will have him for breakfast - in other words if we have to have Bell, he should bat at 8 when the pace bowlers are tired.

[Quagmire]

Originally Posted by Ernest

So back to the present if Hayden is in the side he like Atherton could well fall to the England quick’s, and with respect to all Australia supporters - I said it last year, I really have to stick with what I said then, he should not IMO play in the Ashes series, he should make way for younger players.

Hayden is the best opening batsman in the world, and got a bagging because apparently he had a bad 2005/2006 where he made 1287 runs at 58.50 which included 5 hundreds in 12 matches. He is a better batsman than anyone in the English side and has been for years, so I personally don’t think he should not give up his spot for a younger player. Hayden is one of the best batsman in the history of the game. Easierly one of the best openers to play the game.

[Victor Frankenstein]

It's going to be an interesting one. On paper Australia should walk it, they're playing on their home grounds, in tremendous form and really pumped up for the series and half the team is desperate not to retire as ashes losers. Contrast that with england who are missing most of the key personnel in the quite frankly flukey victory of last time and the replacements just aren't up to that level. Add to that the fact that those remaining aren't in top form and the team as a whole has been performing poorly before their victory over a pakistan side missing their entire frontline bowling attack.

But still, if there's one thing this england side does do is raise it's game when it's the underdog, I can just as easily see Australia dominating the first test but then losing focus again. The fact that we only have to draw is a massive advantage too, it means if we do get ahead then we just have to keep playing rather than trying to force the game into a victory like we did in pakistan and india.

On paper the Australians should have wiped the floor with us last time, but over confidence and the england side playing out of their skin just managed to turn it in our favour, so who knows!

Gambling wise i voted for an Australia victory as it makes the most sense (form, home ground etc..) but there is no reason england can't win it, their side is good enough to draw with the current aussie side and after that it just needs a bit of luck, a couple of easy wickets or whatever to turn a draw into a win.

[greg]

I picked England last summer and because i thought Australia's creaking old men wouldn't be able to last the series and they still have the same older creaking men 18 months on so i can't see England getting beaten.Having said that i think our injuries to key bowlers will stop us being able to put the Aussies away so i have gone for a drawn series.

Whatever happens it is going to be the most hyped series in a long time and hopefully will be as keenly and fairly fought as last summer.

[Alison]

Originally Posted by Ernest

Which brings me to two more players Warne and Bell - well Bell did well in India and against Pakistan, I think he will play Warne ok, but Lee will have him for breakfast - in other words if we have to have Bell, he should bat at 8 when the pace bowlers are tired.

I think you're letting you're prejudices/preconceptions run away with you there Ernest, Bell did fine against Pakistan's fast bowlers, both home and away, I can't see any real reason why he should struggle against Lee in particular.

I also think that to suggest that any specialist batsman should bat at 8 is pretty insulting to that player - more so than suggesting dropping them.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Alison

Bell did fine against Pakistan's fast bowlers, both home and away, I can't see any real reason why he should struggle against Lee in particular.

Quite. Bell is very compact and tight in defense and both confident and technically proficient in his strokeplay: his ability to play fast bowling is not in question (though like all the rest of the England batsmen bar Pietersen, he was lost against McGrath on the slope at Lords...

Bell vs. Warne? Now that IS a concern: in truth, Bell received some glorious deliveries from Warne last summer, balls that had lateral drift on them as well as the usual dip and turn... but Bell did play the wrong line rather too often to be reassuring (though - unlike Cook - he does appear to have the technique and soft hands to play the spinners nicely when he DOES read them properly).

If Tresco doesn't make it to the Ashes (surely feasible given the uncertainty over the forthcoming pyjama jamboree) I'd open with Strauss and Cook and have Bell at three:

Originally Posted by Quagmire 112018

Hayden is the best opening batsman in the world

Well, we'll see. He looks like a very, very good flat track bully most of the time... and whilst he's perhaps one of the best openers in world cricket right now.. that's not saying much: Langer is about the only guy out there who looks as if he'd stand a chance against the likes of the great WI, English, Australian or Pakistani attacks of the past - Hayden might be less of an LBW candidate and through the gate candidate than the others because unlike Tresco, Gayle, Sehwag and others he does actually get his bat and pad together and make good use of his height, getting a long way forward from a starting point outside of the crease.... but that's not playing lateral movement well (as Jayawardene does, going back to give himself time)... it's playing the percentages to AVOID having to play lateral movement well.

The commentators during the Ashes series noted that Hayden has hardly ever been forced right back into the crease. They noted he has mostly only faced tall medium pace bowlers who he can swat to the leg side from the front foot... or fast bowlers with low actions who he can play straight back down the ground due to his immense height and forward position.

If the commentators are right then bowlers like Ambrose would have routinely had Hayden for breakfast... forcing him back into his crease with steepling bounce he can't play from a forward position and then taking their pick from catching the shoulder of the bat, exposing his lack of swivel hook and getting those LBW shouts that aren't feasible when he's out of his crease.

For once, the call for a tall, fast bowler is evident: against any other batsman I'd say Lewis and Hoggard should be England's opening pair as well-placed lateral movement with the new ball will take more wickets than pace and bounce... but England might need at least one of Harmison, Flintoff or Tremlett to expose Hayden - I just hope they can... and not because I particularly want England to win (I don't really care) but because I find it appalling that ANYONE rates Hayden over the far more accomplished Langer (who will, I suspect, fear Hoggard and Lewis FAR more than any of the bounce and pace merchants).

[Ernest]

Originally Posted by Alison

I think you're letting you're prejudices/preconceptions run away with you there Ernest, Bell did fine against Pakistan's fast bowlers, both home and away, I can't see any real reason why he should struggle against Lee in particular.

I remember last year Alison when Bell could not get a score together against the Aussies, he may well have done well against Pakistan and India on their slow pitches, but don't for get he was dropped and only got into the England side in Pakistan because of injury, not on past merit.
I have no prejudices at all whan it comed to England players, I would be only to glad to see Belll getting a hundred in every innings, that would be good for England, but Collingwood the grafter gets my vote every time.

Originally Posted by Alison

I also think that to suggest that any specialist batsman should bat at 8 is pretty insulting to that player - more so than suggesting dropping them.

Well if it appears that I was being insulting, then I am sorry, however I did not write that with the intent of being insulting, I was mearly highlighting the point that he would be safer from a fresh Lee down at #8, no more than that, not really suggesting that he plays at 8.
Another reason that I think Bell won't do well in Australia is that there is more pace and bounce in some of the pitches, and that answers Quagmire over Hayden - he suffered so in 2005, I can't see him doing any better tha Bell against Harmison and Flintoff in particular, just IMO but based on the last Ashes series.

[Rachael]

Originally Posted by Ernest

I remember last year Alison when Bell could not get a score together against the Aussies, he may well have done well against Pakistan and India on their slow pitches [...] he would be safer from a fresh Lee down at #8, no more than that, not really suggesting that he plays at 8 [...] I think Bell won't do well in Australia [...] there is more pace and bounce in some of the pitches

Bell "could not get a score together against the Aussies"? At Old Trafford he hit consecutive half-centuries! His 59 and 65 (that's 124 over two innings) was topped only by Vaughan (and in terms of occupation of the crease Bell bettered even Vaughan: 258 balls, and more than six hours).

Just to refresh your memory... Bell came in with England at 163/2, supported Vaughan as the latter swept England to 290/3 and saw England through to 346/6. In the second innings he came to the crease with England on 97/2 and didn't leave until England were at 264/6!

Protect Bell from LEE? Bell only fell to Lee twice in 10 innings. McGrath got him three times and so did Warne. In his first Test he saw of Lawson and Edwards (a pretty fast double act too good for Tresco, Strauss and Flintoff) at the Oval. In a recent ODI at Sophia Gardens he put on 88 out of England's 202 as Shoaib Akhtar and Mohammad Asif ran through the rest of the England side.

More to the point.. Simon Hughes understands cricket better than most, possibly better than everyone on this board put together... and in today's paper he says "he now has the best all-round game in the team".

[Mr Hutt]

Australia will win, its england who will have to fight to hang on in the ozzy backyard.. true the england team does have a couple of very good batsmen in bell and strauss but the aussies have a lot more firepower in all departments. Does not matter if warne and mcgrath are aging, they need to be consistent wicket takers and they will be, a good case in point will be the DLF tourney in KL take a look at the australian side playing there they are trying youngsters out and still kicking everyone to thailand!!!

ok its a pyjama tournament but look at the concentration on faces in yellow.. scary

[Collyisamackem]

Good start guys, I like it! Just to remind those who live on the planet Zog that the England squad announcement is today at 3pm as far as I know. It's been leaked that Freddie is captain, but who will go along with him?