2nd test Adelaide

First topic message reminder :

all the reprots coming out indicate that this will be a "typical English pitch "
batting friendly, dry, offering reverse and a lot of turn in 2nd inning Alan Border thinks.
 
that wouldn't be what Aus would have liked..and would like to alter whatever bit they can in the end......althouhg I understand it is harder to alter a drop in pitch.
 
Teams:
 
I would like to make a fairly early call on what the team changes might be....not based on what I would like to see but rather..reading into the mind  of the two coaches.
 
--Eng might  bring in Stokes and Bresnan for Trott and Tremlett.
Bresnan is a favorite of Flower mentality.......a batsman and a bowler packed into one.....how much he can hold against the Aussie pace as a batter will be tested....bowling....well he picked 4-fer in some junior game yesterday...in the best of times he struggles to be consistently above 132kph and now coming back from injury...dunno how how fast he can be but certainly can't do worse than Tremlett's 122kph.
 
Stokes I know not much about other than career stats on CI....but he might be picked on the rationale that he is not much less of a batsman than Ballance and Bairstow and can bowl also...spreading the workload over 5 bowlers and cushioning the undercooked Bresnan.
 
--Aus might bring in Faulkner for Bailey.....as he can reverse the ball, was in no less a blistering form with the bat in India then Bailey.....and is a proper brisk fast medium bowler who will cushion the work-load on their genuine pacers preserving them for rocket fast WACA the next test.
This is where Watson's inability to bowl 15 overs a day is putting more pressure on him.....and should Faulkner have a good game and Watson not......he is at risk of being edged out....not immediately but sooner than later.

cook gone

pulled one that took top edge 1-1

Why am I watching this again..

What in the holy f*ckwittery are you doing Alistair Cook

Captain supposed to lead by example. Shocking dismissal.

You know you're beaten mentally when your captain does that in the 2nd over trying to rescue the test.

Lessons to be learned, not least picking Joe Roots position from a lottery pre game

So Warne was right.

And the nightmare continues for Cook...

Over by tea ?

Oops, just turned over to the cricket expecting to see Australia flaying us around for a bit, but instead saw Cook commit suicide with a ridiculous shot.

What was he thinking?!

Now we're not even scoring runs and are just waiting for the inevitable. Is there going to be rain to ride to our rescue?

Otherwise England will be 2 down with a quick turnaround to a ground where they never seem to do well.

Carbs hits a boundary! The RR is now super-brisk - just under one an over!

All is lost here with England 20 for 2 and the best they can hope to acheive from this is that a lot of the out of form England batsmen can use this as an opportunity to find a modicum of form and play themselves out of a rut. Two wickets down to hardly daunting balls caught in the deep.

This is ridiculous. This pitch is an absolute featherbed. Two players out hooking when the bowling has looked totally innocuous. Let's see if KP can avoid the flamengo shot today.

Might as well go out in a blaze of glory now. Attack!

Come on Kp pull it out.. Come on lad you know you want to.

Nasser done a spot on evaluation of England's batsmen pre-play today. Their brains are scrambled. That being the case there is no way back in the series and a 5-0 drubbing is on the cards. Therefore is it a time to blood new players without mental battle scars who Australua need to work out how to dismiss? England 26 for 2.

The last time super Kev played at this ground in a Test match, he scored a double ton.

#itaintovertillitsover

Duty281 wrote:Oops, just turned over to the cricket expecting to see Australia flaying us around for a bit, but instead saw Cook commit suicide with a ridiculous shot.

What was he thinking?!

Now we're not even scoring runs and are just waiting for the inevitable. Is there going to be rain to ride to our rescue?

Otherwise England will be 2 down with a quick turnaround to a ground where they never seem to do well.

But that is the trouble when you are getting smashed...whatever you do is wrong : If they block for over after over then they are ensuring one with their name on it will come along sooner or later...if they try and take the bowlers on any loose shot will be condemned (Cook made a mess of that hook ; but in better times he often puts those to the boundary. I won't complain about the intent , just the execution )

After a number of heavy reverses , it is easy for players to become muddled in their minds and then of course they fail to play instinctively : paralysis through too much thought can take hold. When someone is propelling a ball at you in excess of 90mph there isn't really time to think ; you have to allow the trained reflex to act for
you.
The England batsmen must free themselves of the constraints of over thinking the consequences and return to playing naturally. This is not to advocate recklessness or premeditated attempts to attack no matter what ; just to try and get back to playing as most of these fellows have shown themselves able to do in the past.

Perhaps easier from my couch than out in the middle in Adelaide   But it is necessary if England are to make any sort of fight back in this series.

Only another 506 to win.
No probs. 

CaledonianCraig wrote:Nasser done a spot on evaluation of England's batsmen pre-play today. Their brains are scrambled. That being the case there is no way back in the series and a 5-0 drubbing  is on the cards. Therefore is it a time to blood new players without mental battle scars who Australia need to work out how to dismiss? England 26 for 2.

No, I don't think so. The new players would soon have mental scars too.

Nasser is a genius! Surely he saw the same signs in Brisbane too?

CaledonianCraig wrote:All is lost here with England 20 for 2 and the best they can hope to acheive from this is that a lot of the out of form England batsmen can use this as an opportunity to find a modicum of form and play themselves out of a rut. Two wickets down to hardly daunting balls caught in the deep.

The one thing I would add is that they were both good catches. I don't know that much of the strengths of the Australian fielders but am pretty certain that Clarke made sure the right men were in the right positions. I wouldn't have fancied Panesar to take either chance; more concerningly, would Cook have ensured that better fielders than Panesar were in those positions?

England need to rebuild after this series. They look a comatose team right now, and they've been pretty bloody tired since the UAE series over a year ago with only the occasional hurrah in between.

Flower does have to go, whether it's win, lose or draw in this series, and England have to start again - just like they did nearly five years ago in the spring of 2009. England's goals and targets have to be reassessed - I don't think this team have had a direction since beating India 4-0. Then some harsh calls have to be made with regards to selection.

Start again. Hit the reset button.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Nasser done a spot on evaluation of England's batsmen pre-play today. Their brains are scrambled. That being the case there is no way back in the series and a 5-0 drubbing  is on the cards. Therefore is it a time to blood new players without mental battle scars who Australua need to work out how to dismiss? England 26 for 2.

Hmm. Is it better to try to unscramble some brains , or to toss a couple of untried hopefuls into the cauldron and make sure they collect some battle scars of their own pretty quickly ?
A turnaround looks unlikely at the moment. But as I pointed out a day or two ago , Australia looked pretty down and out after Lord's a scant four months ago , yet came back to dominate at Old Trafford...

There will be a couple of changes for Perth. But wholesale axe-swinging isn't the answer. And I concede , there may not actually be an answer in the short term  

guildfordbat wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:All is lost here with England 20 for 2 and the best they can hope to acheive from this is that a lot of the out of form England batsmen can use this as an opportunity to find a modicum of form and play themselves out of a rut. Two wickets down to hardly daunting balls caught in the deep.

The one thing I would add is that they were both good catches. I don't know that much of the strengths of the Australian fielders but am pretty certain that Clarke made sure the right men were in the right positions. I wouldn't have fancied Panesar to take either chance; more concerningly, would Cook have ensured that better fielders than Panesar were in those positions?

I am not knocking the catches - two very slick catches. The point is they were two wickets out to innocuous balls early in their innings - freebies if you will.

Linebreaker wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Nasser done a spot on evaluation of England's batsmen pre-play today. Their brains are scrambled. That being the case there is no way back in the series and a 5-0 drubbing  is on the cards. Therefore is it a time to blood new players without mental battle scars who Australia need to work out how to dismiss? England 26 for 2.

No, I don't think so. The new players would soon have mental scars too.

Nasser is a genius! Surely he saw the same signs in Brisbane too?

I'm with Linebreaker. Plenty of players don't have mental scars but that doesn't mean they're suitable for Test cricket. We appear to have a serious problem with our batting but it'll only get worse if we are deluded enough to believe there is an easy quick fix.

guildfordbat wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:All is lost here with England 20 for 2 and the best they can hope to acheive from this is that a lot of the out of form England batsmen can use this as an opportunity to find a modicum of form and play themselves out of a rut. Two wickets down to hardly daunting balls caught in the deep.

The one thing I would add is that they were both good catches. I don't know that much of the strengths of the Australian fielders but am pretty certain that Clarke made sure the right men were in the right positions. I wouldn't have fancied Panesar to take either chance; more concerningly, would Cook have ensured that better fielders than Panesar were in those positions?

Whilst agreeing they were good catches, surely Harris and Lyon would be in the bottom half of Australia's fielders? I'd struggle to think who I'd regard as worse. The fact is they aren't carrying any fielding passengers like Monty.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:All is lost here with England 20 for 2 and the best they can hope to acheive from this is that a lot of the out of form England batsmen can use this as an opportunity to find a modicum of form and play themselves out of a rut. Two wickets down to hardly daunting balls caught in the deep.

The one thing I would add is that they were both good catches. I don't know that much of the strengths of the Australian fielders but am pretty certain that Clarke made sure the right men were in the right positions. I wouldn't have fancied Panesar to take either chance; more concerningly, would Cook have ensured that better fielders than Panesar were in those positions?

I am not knocking the catches - two very slick catches. The point is they were two wickets out to innocuous balls early in their innings - freebies if you will.

Craig - I know you weren't knocking the catches and took your point. You appear to have missed mine.

I'm yet to see a play and miss in this innings. If this was Day 1 of the test match, I'd be saying England should be making 500 plus. If you were to pick a pitch to set a WR test chase it would be this one.

Born Slippy wrote:I'm yet to see a play and miss in this innings. If this was Day 1 of the test match, I'd be saying England should be making 500 plus. If you were to pick a pitch to set a WR test chase it would be this one.

Optimism.

alfie wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Nasser done a spot on evaluation of England's batsmen pre-play today. Their brains are scrambled. That being the case there is no way back in the series and a 5-0 drubbing  is on the cards. Therefore is it a time to blood new players without mental battle scars who Australua need to work out how to dismiss? England 26 for 2.

Hmm.  Is it better to try to unscramble some brains , or to toss a couple of untried hopefuls into the cauldron and make sure they collect some battle scars of their own pretty quickly ?
A turnaround looks unlikely at the moment.  But as I pointed out a day or two ago , Australia looked pretty down and out after Lord's a scant four months ago , yet came back to dominate at Old Trafford...

There will be a couple of changes for Perth.  But wholesale axe-swinging isn't the answer.  And I concede , there may not actually be an answer in the short term  

Who knows if any new players will gain battle scars but it will offer Australia fresh problems to solve. After all they have worked out plans for a number of current players due to familiarity. Also blooding new players in this environment will tellbus a lot about whether they are up to the job and challenge.

As for your point about turnarounds in this series - there won't be any. Mentally England are fried, confidence is shot and self belief is zilch whereas Australia are in the ascendency. This isn't a Rocky film where you see Rocky taking blow after blow after blow then miraculously from nowhere turns it around - it doesn't happen in real life. It is more like watching a Bruno V Tyson fightbwhere you knowcthe outcome is inevitable.

Axe swing widescale may not be the answer but neither is churning out the same battered and beaten side.

All the talk of Monty being a passenger in the field. 2 of England's 12 wickets taken were his, and he had the fourth longest innings of the side in the 1st innings. All rounder who isn't the best in the field? Give him a break

3 things going in England's favour right now:

1) Johnson is tiring and will be out of the attack soon.
2) The ball is softening.
3) Root + KP are settled.

guildfordbat wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:All is lost here with England 20 for 2 and the best they can hope to acheive from this is that a lot of the out of form England batsmen can use this as an opportunity to find a modicum of form and play themselves out of a rut. Two wickets down to hardly daunting balls caught in the deep.

The one thing I would add is that they were both good catches. I don't know that much of the strengths of the Australian fielders but am pretty certain that Clarke made sure the right men were in the right positions. I wouldn't have fancied Panesar to take either chance; more concerningly, would Cook have ensured that better fielders than Panesar were in those positions?

I am not knocking the catches - two very slick catches. The point is they were two wickets out to innocuous balls early in their innings - freebies if you will.

Craig - I know you weren't knocking the catches and took your point. You appear to have missed mine.

That Clarke had the right men deep? Not really relevant I think the real relevance is two wickets down to innocuous balls.

Duty281 wrote:England need to rebuild after this series. They look a comatose team right now, and they've been pretty bloody tired since the UAE series over a year ago with only the occasional hurrah in between.

Flower does have to go, whether it's win, lose or draw in this series, and England have to start again - just like they did nearly five years ago in the spring of 2009. England's goals and targets have to be reassessed - I don't think this team have had a direction since beating India 4-0. Then some harsh calls have to be made with regards to selection.

Start again. Hit the reset button.

OK , who kidnapped the real Duty ? Not like you to join the gloom and doom mob so quickly ! I fear you have been spending too much time on the Football board and caught the Sack the Manager Virus  

Seriously , the middle of a series is no time to start thinking about who to sack when it is over : to do so is to concede the remaining matches before you play them. Suppose it doesn't really matter what we on here think , but I would absolutely hate the players to start thinking that way. To use one of your own favourite sentiments , keep the faith.
By the end of the series it will perhaps be apparent which players need replacing and which just need to reset their own games.
Unless you want to condemn the team to years in the wilderness , evolution not revolution will be the way to go.

Duty281 wrote:3 things going in England's favour right now:

1) Johnson is tiring and will be out of the attack soon.
2) The ball is softening.
3) Root + KP are settled.

1. There is no rush though and he is being used sparingly.

2. True but they have softened the ball before and still went on to throw their wickets away.

3. True and the best hope here is that they can use the opportunity to find a bit of form and instill a bit of confidence back for remaining tests. The result here is still not in doubt - a comfortable win by 300+ runs for Australia.

alfie wrote:

Duty281 wrote:England need to rebuild after this series. They look a comatose team right now, and they've been pretty bloody tired since the UAE series over a year ago with only the occasional hurrah in between.

Flower does have to go, whether it's win, lose or draw in this series, and England have to start again - just like they did nearly five years ago in the spring of 2009. England's goals and targets have to be reassessed - I don't think this team have had a direction since beating India 4-0. Then some harsh calls have to be made with regards to selection.

Start again. Hit the reset button.

OK , who kidnapped the real Duty ?   Not like you to join the gloom and doom mob so quickly !  I fear you have been spending too much time on the Football board and caught the Sack the Manager Virus  

Seriously , the middle of a series is no time to start thinking about who to sack when it is over : to do so is to concede the remaining matches before you play them. Suppose it doesn't really matter what we on here think  , but I would absolutely hate the players to start thinking that way. To use one of your own favourite sentiments , keep the faith.
By the end of the series it will perhaps be apparent which players need replacing and which just need to reset their own games.
Unless you want to condemn the team to years in the wilderness , evolution not revolution will be the way to go.

I do rather enjoy keeping the faith but England just aren't as good as they were in 2010/11. The intensity has gone, the motivation is lacking, and the selections are becoming more jumbled.

Realistically, Flower has taken England as far as he can. Harsh as it may be, it's time to rebuild after this series.

I won't say England have lost this series just yet - we all know how fragile the Australian order can be and what England's bowlers are capable of producing. The batting is the real worry though.

Still, only 474 runs from victory!

CaledonianCraig wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:All is lost here with England 20 for 2 and the best they can hope to acheive from this is that a lot of the out of form England batsmen can use this as an opportunity to find a modicum of form and play themselves out of a rut. Two wickets down to hardly daunting balls caught in the deep.

The one thing I would add is that they were both good catches. I don't know that much of the strengths of the Australian fielders but am pretty certain that Clarke made sure the right men were in the right positions. I wouldn't have fancied Panesar to take either chance; more concerningly, would Cook have ensured that better fielders than Panesar were in those positions?

I am not knocking the catches - two very slick catches. The point is they were two wickets out to innocuous balls early in their innings - freebies if you will.

Craig - I know you weren't knocking the catches and took your point. You appear to have missed mine.

That Clarke had the right men deep? Not really relevant I think the real relevance is two wickets down to innocuous balls.

I wasn't arguing what is the most relevant factor but trying to additionally flag that imo Cook's captaincy in this Test has been some way short of top notch; in particular, some of his field settings (or lack of them) and the particular individuals placed in key positions.

England have never came back from 2-0 down in any series and the stark reality is that this England side are mentally shot and woefully out of form in key areas. That is no foundation whatsoever to mount a ground-breaking comeback from.

guildfordbat wrote:

Linebreaker wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Nasser done a spot on evaluation of England's batsmen pre-play today. Their brains are scrambled. That being the case there is no way back in the series and a 5-0 drubbing  is on the cards. Therefore is it a time to blood new players without mental battle scars who Australia need to work out how to dismiss? England 26 for 2.

No, I don't think so. The new players would soon have mental scars too.

Nasser is a genius! Surely he saw the same signs in Brisbane too?

I'm with Linebreaker. Plenty of players don't have mental scars but that doesn't mean they're suitable for Test cricket. We appear to have a serious problem with our batting but it'll only get worse if we are deluded enough to believe there is an easy quick fix.

CaledonianCraig wrote:  Is it better to try to unscramble some brains , or to toss a couple of untried hopefuls into the cauldron and make sure they collect some battle scars of their own pretty quickly ?
A turnaround looks unlikely at the moment.  But as I pointed out a day or two ago , Australia looked pretty down and out after Lord's a scant four months ago , yet came back to dominate at Old Trafford...

There will be a couple of changes for Perth.  But wholesale axe-swinging isn't the answer.  And I concede , there may not actually be an answer in the short term  

Who knows if any new players will gain battle scars but it will offer Australia fresh problems to solve. After all they have worked out plans for a number of current players due to familiarity.  Also blooding new players in this environment will tell us a lot about whether they are up to the job and challenge.

Axe swing widescale may not be the answer but neither is churning out the same battered and beaten side.

So somewhere in between then.

Perth will give England the opportunity to gear towards a "fight fire with fire" approach. You need to keep the core players plus one or two currently underperforming ones (in the hope that they can turn their game around). Maybe also give Swann a rest (Monty too?) and add two of either Bresnan/Finn/Tremlett. Probably keep Prior there but move Bell to 3 and Root can revert back to 6. I just think you need to salvage as many of the more senior experienced players as possible (not a knee-jerk reaction like Aus post 2008 to fill the void left by the retirements) and hope that Root, Carberry, Stokes, etc aren't too 'mentally damaged' by this experience in Adelaide especially.

guildfordbat wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:All is lost here with England 20 for 2 and the best they can hope to acheive from this is that a lot of the out of form England batsmen can use this as an opportunity to find a modicum of form and play themselves out of a rut. Two wickets down to hardly daunting balls caught in the deep.

The one thing I would add is that they were both good catches. I don't know that much of the strengths of the Australian fielders but am pretty certain that Clarke made sure the right men were in the right positions. I wouldn't have fancied Panesar to take either chance; more concerningly, would Cook have ensured that better fielders than Panesar were in those positions?

I am not knocking the catches - two very slick catches. The point is they were two wickets out to innocuous balls early in their innings - freebies if you will.

Craig - I know you weren't knocking the catches and took your point. You appear to have missed mine.

That Clarke had the right men deep? Not really relevant I think the real relevance is two wickets down to innocuous balls.

I wasn't arguing what is the most relevant factor but trying to additionally flag that imo Cook's captaincy in this Test has been some way short of top notch; in particular, some of his field settings (or lack of them) and the particular individuals placed in key positions.

Hmm I am not so sure. The difference is Australia's batsmen are far less prone to holing out to innocuous balls. Not anything to do with field settings and more to do with England's failings with the bat.

Hey Caledonian Craig ...I hear what you are saying , but beg to differ.

Your Rocky film - Tyson/Bruno comparison was amusing , but I have seen enough cricket to know that such turnarounds do indeed happen
Not often , and I said myself it looks unlikely here : but to rule it out is effectively to give up ; which you should never do in sport. You are of course at liberty to descend into gloom (though you actually seem quite a cheerful fellow normally , especially for one from North of the Wall  ) ; but I do hope the players are a bit more resilient.

CaledonianCraig wrote:England have never came back from 2-0 down in any series and the stark reality is that this England side are mentally shot and woefully out of form in key areas. That is no foundation whatsoever to mount a ground-breaking comeback from.

On the other hand, miracles are possible. #spiritof1981

Linebreaker wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

Linebreaker wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Nasser done a spot on evaluation of England's batsmen pre-play today. Their brains are scrambled. That being the case there is no way back in the series and a 5-0 drubbing  is on the cards. Therefore is it a time to blood new players without mental battle scars who Australia need to work out how to dismiss? England 26 for 2.

No, I don't think so. The new players would soon have mental scars too.

Nasser is a genius! Surely he saw the same signs in Brisbane too?

I'm with Linebreaker. Plenty of players don't have mental scars but that doesn't mean they're suitable for Test cricket. We appear to have a serious problem with our batting but it'll only get worse if we are deluded enough to believe there is an easy quick fix.

CaledonianCraig wrote:  Is it better to try to unscramble some brains , or to toss a couple of untried hopefuls into the cauldron and make sure they collect some battle scars of their own pretty quickly ?
A turnaround looks unlikely at the moment.  But as I pointed out a day or two ago , Australia looked pretty down and out after Lord's a scant four months ago , yet came back to dominate at Old Trafford...

There will be a couple of changes for Perth.  But wholesale axe-swinging isn't the answer.  And I concede , there may not actually be an answer in the short term  

Who knows if any new players will gain battle scars but it will offer Australia fresh problems to solve. After all they have worked out plans for a number of current players due to familiarity.  Also blooding new players in this environment will tell us a lot about whether they are up to the job and challenge.

Axe swing widescale may not be the answer but neither is churning out the same battered and beaten side.

So somewhere in between then.

Perth will give England the opportunity to gear towards a "fight fire with fire" approach. You need to keep the core players plus one or two currently underperforming ones (in the hope that they can turn their game around). Maybe also give Swann a rest (Monty too?) and add two of either Bresnan/Finn/Tremlett. Probably keep Prior there but move Bell to 3 and Root can revert back to 6. I just think you need to salvage as many of the more senior experienced players as possible (not a knee-jerk reaction like Aus post 2008 to fill the void left by the retirements) and hope that Root, Carberry, Stokes, etc aren't too 'mentally damaged' by this experience in Adelaide especially.

Yes somewhere in between. Obviously, stick with the younger players such as Root as he has showed decent mental fortitude, Stokes as he could be one for the future, Carberry as he has remarkably looked the most tuned in batsman apart from Bell, Pietersen may be batting himself back into form here and Bell is in good nick. Definitely get Finn in and maybe Bresnan for Perth.

65/2 at lunch.

Calm decent cricket from these two in.

good players, relaxed enough- Showing no fear.

It is off course to late to dream- but if they can both get goodish scores - we will have 3 batters (including bell) semi confident again.

alfie wrote:Hey Caledonian Craig ...I hear what you are saying , but beg to differ.

Your Rocky film - Tyson/Bruno comparison was amusing , but I have seen enough cricket to know that such turnarounds do indeed happen
Not often , and I said myself it looks unlikely here : but to rule it out is effectively to give up ; which you should never do in sport. You are of course at liberty to descend into gloom (though you actually seem quite a cheerful fellow normally , especially for one from North of the Wall  ) ; but I do hope the players are a bit more resilient.

It isn't about gloom though - more like reality and knowing when the writing is on the wall. Obviously, I am not advocating the players give up but more making the point that they are not in the right place mentally or form-wise to turn this around.

Now if England got out of this test with a draw it could prove a massive turning point (almost qualifying as a test match won mentally). Even batting long until say around tea tomorrow before losing would be a plus as it would show batsmen that they can survive for a ling time.

I just did some quick calculations.

94 runs a session required with hopefully no breaks for rain.
England need to keep the scoreboard ticking, get on top of the bowlers.

If they can get around 85 runs/session for the remainder of today - they'd be around 235 at the close of play - no more than 3 or 4 wickets down. One of either Root, KP, Bell still there.

Then it's only a matter of 99 runs/session tomorrow. Who knows... if KP gets a roll on. Am I being too optimistic thinking like this?

Yes

Looks like it might rain tomorrow - draw on the cards?

Could even rain later this afternoon.

Just checking the weather channel - 29.2 deg C, humidity is low at 28% in Adelaide winds from NNW at 11 km/h

Kingscote (about 120km SW of Adelaide on Kangaroo Is) 25.9 deg C, humidity 49% and rising, winds from the S at 22km/h and increasing.

The southerly will blow through in the next few hours. Isolated light showers only though.

1.Cook
2.Carberry
3.Bell
4.Pietersen
5.Root
6.Stokes
7.Prior
8.Bresnan
9.Broad
10.Anderson
11.Panesar

At the moment that would be my choice for Perth in which I've made the changes based on back to basics. Get your best middle order batsmen up the order, i.e. Bell at 3 and pick your best three seamers and best spinner which at the moment I feel is Monty.

Bottom line is that no matter what changes we make we desperately need Cook, KP (batting better currently to be fair), Prior and Anderson to stand up and be counted as senior players.

The other thing these tests have highlighted is our need for a genuine pace bowler in certain conditions.

- Broad and Finn can bowl quick spells but aren't rapid by any means.
- Bresnan and Anderson are seamers, though Big Tim does hit the track hard.
- Sadly Tremlett is well down on pace from where he used to be, as Surrey fans are only too aware - why cant those pesky selectors listen to Guildford on these matters?  

For Perth I'd put Ballance in for Stokes (we need the extra batting more than the bowling), and Bresnan in for Panesar. Keep Root at 3 though.

As for today, the pitch is literally dying in front of my eyes. England have to believe that they can see this out.

Nice shot there by super Kev.