3rd Ashes Test, Perth

Western Australia next, which means staying up even later to watch the start of the third test.

You would think Perth is one place the Aussies should win, so what do we do?

Panic, and drop Swann, but leave Monty in? Or perhaps play four or five seamers? Has Stokes done enough? He showed plenty of attitude, so yes, he probably has.

Has Prior done enough to see him promoted to six, as Stokes isn't one..............yet? Maybe not but we have to try and win, and playing him at six, would enable us to play five bowlers again, with Monty dropping out.

Who comes in? Finn, the 90mph quickie, with a strike rate around 50? Reliable Tim? Just coming back from injury but will give 100%, won't get smacked around, and can bat a bit. Or rankin? This would be the biggest gamble imo, as he has no test experience.

My team:

Cook
Carberry
Root
Pietersen
Bell
Prior
Stokes
Broad
Swann
Finn
Anderson

Seems strange doesn't it that after 3 and a half terrible batting performances most of the talk on here and in the press seems to revolve around which bowling changes should be made for the next test. Is that an indication that, as far as batting is concerned, England don't really have any real depth?

Hoggy_Bear wrote:Seems strange doesn't it that after 3 and a half terrible batting performances most of the talk on here and in the press seems to revolve around which bowling changes should be made for the next test. Is that an indication that, as far as batting is concerned, England don't really have any real depth?

Definitely. We have better options with the ball.

Hoggy_Bear wrote:Seems strange doesn't it that after 3 and a half terrible batting performances most of the talk on here and in the press seems to revolve around which bowling changes should be made for the next test. Is that an indication that, as far as batting is concerned, England don't really have any real depth?

Perhaps but more the crux of the problem is would you really consider dropping any of Cook, Bell, Pietersen or Root who have been such an important part of the winning side of late? I would say not. Carberry as well hasn't done much wrong and is one of those rare things about England batsmen in this series in that he has scored 100+ runs to date.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Hoggy_Bear wrote:Seems strange doesn't it that after 3 and a half terrible batting performances most of the talk on here and in the press seems to revolve around which bowling changes should be made for the next test. Is that an indication that, as far as batting is concerned, England don't really have any real depth?

Perhaps but more the crux of the problem is would you really consider dropping any of Cook, Bell, Pietersen or Root who have been such an important part of the winning side of late? I would say not. Carberry as well hasn't done much wrong and is one of those rare things about England batsmen in this series in that he has scored 100+ runs to date.

That's the thing though. Most of our recent success has been achieved through our bowling. Non of our batsmen has been consistently successful over the last two years. Yet we are far more willing to change our bowlers than our batsmen which indicates that we haven't got the depth in our batting that we have in our bowling.
You know who's got the highest batting average for England over the last two years (ie. from 9/12/11)? Chris Woakes, with an average of 42 from 1 game. Only Cook and Root have managed to average above 40 in that period. Those are pretty poor stats. Yet there doesn't seem to be any large number of batsmen coming through to displace those already in the team. That's a bit of a worry.

Definitely the worry is the lack of youngsters to turn to but would you really advocate dropping Pietersen, Bell or Cook considering what we know they can do on-form whereas youngsters are untried and unproven. However, it is a worry.

Carberry is well into his 30's so is merely a stop gap and not one for the future so I don't see the point in his inclusion. Don't get me wrong he has looked the more competent of the England batsmen here but would it have not been wiser to blood a youngster and give him experience which would prove valuable? Elsewhere in the batting line-up Pietersen may not see another Ashes Series and Bell is now in his early 30's so England should be looking at the young options out there now as this once great England side is surely bound to be disbanded of a lot of its personnel in the next few years.

Anyone keen on picking Tremlett for the WACA? I've quite literally seen Afridi bowl faster than him, but there is something to be said about his steeping bounce.

kingraf wrote:Anyone keen on picking Tremlett for the WACA? I've quite literally seen Afridi bowl faster than him, but there is something to be said about his steeping bounce.

I would have Tremlett in at the WACA, he will cause the Aussie top order some real problems.

Nachos Jones wrote:

kingraf wrote:Anyone keen on picking Tremlett for the WACA? I've quite literally seen Afridi bowl faster than him, but there is something to be said about his steeping bounce.

I would have Tremlett in at the WACA, he will cause the Aussie top order some real problems.

At 80mph?

Seeing Afridi chuck in a quicker ball at 132kmh remains one of the true shocks I've experiences. I mean if he can do it from a six step run-up out the back of his hand, what's wrong with Tremlett?

CaledonianCraig wrote:Definitely the worry is the lack of youngsters to turn to but would you really advocate dropping Pietersen, Bell or Cook considering what we know they can do on-form whereas youngsters are untried and unproven. However, it is a worry.

Carberry is well into his 30's so is merely a stop gap and not one for the future so I don't see the point in his inclusion. Don't get me wrong he has looked the more competent of the England batsmen here but would it have not been wiser to blood a youngster and give him experience which would prove valuable? Elsewhere in the batting line-up Pietersen may not see another Ashes Series and Bell is now in his early 30's so England should be looking at the young options out there now as this once great England side is surely bound to be disbanded of a lot of its personnel in the next few years.

Can't see many changes being made in this series because, as I say, there aren't that many options. But England will need to address the two (three) problem areas in their batting line-up soon. Partner for Cook (is Root the long-term answer? Then put him at 1 and keep him there throughout the Summer), number 3 (Bell or A.N. Other), number 6 (is Stokes a good enough bat, or would we be better served with with a pure batsman. If so, who?).
If Prior doesn't score a few more runs soon, we might need to look at his place as well.

Stella wrote:

Nachos Jones wrote:

kingraf wrote:Anyone keen on picking Tremlett for the WACA? I've quite literally seen Afridi bowl faster than him, but there is something to be said about his steeping bounce.

I would have Tremlett in at the WACA, he will cause the Aussie top order some real problems.

At 80mph?

Yes, Tremlett will be able to get that extra bounce at the WACA which will worry the Aussies.

Nachos Jones wrote:

Stella wrote:

Nachos Jones wrote:

kingraf wrote:Anyone keen on picking Tremlett for the WACA? I've quite literally seen Afridi bowl faster than him, but there is something to be said about his steeping bounce.

I would have Tremlett in at the WACA, he will cause the Aussie top order some real problems.

At 80mph?

Yes, Tremlett will be able to get that extra bounce at the WACA which will worry the Aussies.

Would Finn or Rankin not be able to do the same?

Nachos Jones wrote:

Stella wrote:

Nachos Jones wrote:

kingraf wrote:Anyone keen on picking Tremlett for the WACA? I've quite literally seen Afridi bowl faster than him, but there is something to be said about his steeping bounce.

I would have Tremlett in at the WACA, he will cause the Aussie top order some real problems.

At 80mph?

Yes, Tremlett will be able to get that extra bounce at the WACA which will worry the Aussies.

A bouncer at 80mph shouldn't worry them too much. One at 90 might.

A bouncer at 90mph doesn't mean much if it's short and wide.

Finn does need to be picked, but it seems a gamble, one I am almost completely sure will not work, and even if it does, I'm pretty sure he'll be so expensive it counters the pick.

Finn maybe able too but I am not sure about Rankin to be honest. I just think that Tremlett is a much more controlled bowler and believe that he will cause problems. Him and Broad together will be very interesting.

kingraf wrote:A bouncer at 90mph doesn't mean much if it's short and wide.

Well no, but Tremlett, Rankin or Finn could bowl them.

I don't think that England should have two spinners at the WACA but who to drop, Panesar or Swann?

I would say that Panesar has bowled the better of the two but I also think that Swann carries his bat better so I would have to say Panesar out for Tremlett on that basis alone.

I would stick with Swann as he is proven over a longer spell of time and can bat a bit but Monty can count himself a little unfortunate. Not sure at all about Tremlett and would sooner see Finn let lose. He'll be chomping at the bit and is the quickest bowler at England's disposal.

Good to see you're still posting on here CC. We used to have some good chats

I just feel that Tremlett has more control than Finn. Finn will trouble the Aussie batsmen but will also be very expensive so for me Tremlett gets the nod.

Cheers Nachos.

With all due respects though (more than anything else) England need wickets in Perth and Finn is a little more of a strike bowler than Tremlett and the key for me is he has more pace. Also he is fractionally better with the bat as well. Another thing is the age factor - Finn is 24, Tremlett is 32. Younger and fresher Finn for me and give him his chance as Tremlett had his at Brisbane.

I would go...

Cook
Carbs
Root
Pieterson
Bell
Stokes
Prior
Bresnan
Broad
Anderson
Finn

  

Chris Tremlett would have been an ideal choice 3 years ago when he could bowl real quick. But not this 80 MPH imposter. Has to be Finn or Rankin for me. Swann is England's led spinner, but Monty seems to be more effective on a track with some bounce. He has ones taken a 5for here hasn't he? Swanny is in poor form with the ball, and strangely, he made a better bat in the last test, Swann batted with no sense of confidence and really didn't brave it out like Monty did. I would debate that choice, eventually I might go in with Swanny, but it is not that straight forward.

Got to see I was really impressed with Stokes in this game. Mainly by his attitude and his bowling, but his batting flashed some signs of potential if he can iron some of the more obvious technical flaws out. Particularly liked his little altercation with Johnson, in a series where England have been criticised for not showing enough fight this showed me that he isn't afraid to back down from anybody. Bowled nicely and with decent pace too, clearly not a number 6 at Test level yet but I think he's definitely got the potential to develop into one in time. Hope he gets a run in the side, although where his best position is is up for debate at the moment.

JDizzle wrote:Got to see I was really impressed with Stokes in this game. Mainly by his attitude and his bowling, but his batting flashed some signs of potential if he can iron some of the more obvious technical flaws out. Particularly liked his little altercation with Johnson, in a series where England have been criticised for not showing enough fight this showed me that he isn't afraid to back down from anybody. Bowled nicely and with decent pace too, clearly not a number 6 at Test level yet but I think he's definitely got the potential to develop into one in time. Hope he gets a run in the side, although where his best position is is up for debate at the moment.

I would definitely agree there. To not show himself up when debuting in a team in crisis says a lot. One worth sticking with as England have to start looking to the future. Drop him down a slot or two in the batting line-up though.

http://www.ecb.co.uk/news/england

"I need to lead from the front......says Cook"

by stating such obvious.....he wins no points...but puts himsefl under more and unnecessary pressure.

Ques) Who is goading him to make such ridiculous statements in public?

ans) He who goaded Strauss into taking explicit moral responsibility of the defeat and submitting resignation after loss vs SA and surrender of No.1 ranking....and making Strauss the implicit scapegoat for the KP-gate mess.

He who doesn't mind taking the credits for the revival, renassinace, multiple ashes wins....but goads poor hapeless "yes sir captains"  and "known" mentally sufering patients   to accept "it's all their fault" in the media.

who is he

Unless he does  things really diffrently....Einstien's definition of insanity applies
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/alberteins133991.html

KP you do have a quite strong dislike for Andy... Did he ever score a big ton vs India?

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63906.html

kingraf wrote:KP you do have a quite strong dislike for Andy... Did he ever score a big ton vs India?

Yes two centuries and one double century V India in 1993 and in 2000 (twice).

Aaaah mystery solved.

kingraf wrote:KP you do have a quite strong dislike for Andy... Did he ever score a big ton vs India?

by that underlined rationale I shouldn't be a KP_Fan   

b.t.w you got the answer right.......you are clever   

it didn't need an Einstien thouhg to figure that   

Yeah..
but maybe it's because he scored a big ton, and he
- took all the credit for it
- Didn't thank KP
- then said something about Test match skill
- cowardly Allowed a teammate with a stress related illness to open against the might of Javagal Srinath, Agakar mad Zak..

Bring Finn in, yes he may be expensive but i'd rather we throw a bit of caution to the wind rather than play it safe with Bresnan. However, i am concerned with Finn's pace. In the summer vs the Aussies, it was right back down to mid to low 80's. Last night Botham did a 3rd man highlighting his short run up and how he bowled at 90mph, got plenty of bounce but more importantly, was accurate. I have no idea why he's reverted back to his old technique, because he becomes less quick and less accurate. Needs to go back to his short run up. If its a case of what you feel more comfortable with = less pace and less accuracy or don't feel as comfortable but bowl quicker and more accurate I know what one i'd be picking!!!

Hoggy_Bear wrote:Seems strange doesn't it that after 3 and a half terrible batting performances most of the talk on here and in the press seems to revolve around which bowling changes should be made for the next test. Is that an indication that, as far as batting is concerned, England don't really have any real depth?

Hoggy - just caught up with a recording of the Breakfast highlights on SKY. Alec Stewart highlighted the batting woes and, whilst suggesting that the top five remain ''as is'',  he speculated on bringing in Ballance at 6 to lengthen the batting and have Stokes and Prior both dropping down a place to 7 and 8 respectively. His final three at 9, 10 and Jack in this scenario were Bresnan, Broad and Anderson.

Stewart was clearly uncomfortable about leaving out Swann - ''unthinkable'' until recently he said - but thought it might have to be the way forward for the selectors. However, Stewart was certain about Bresnan's inclusion - ''Bresnan will definitely come in. That's just a given.''

Surprised by a lot of that and don't agree with it much but food for thought.

Liam wrote:Bring Finn in, yes he may be expensive but i'd rather we throw a bit of caution to the wind rather than play it safe with Bresnan. However, i am concerned with Finn's pace. In the summer vs the Aussies, it was right back down to mid to low 80's. Last night Botham did a 3rd man highlighting his short run up and how he bowled at 90mph, got plenty of bounce but more importantly, was accurate. I have no idea why he's reverted back to his old technique, because he becomes less quick and less accurate. Needs to go back to his short run up. If its a case of what you feel more comfortable with = less pace and less accuracy or don't feel as comfortable but bowl quicker and more accurate I know what one i'd be picking!!!

Liam - I saw that Third Man feature, good and interesting one. Atherton's comment immediately afterwards was key for me and rather worrying, along the lines of ''Perhaps Finn doesn't know at the moment what he's most comfortable with.''

Yes I saw the same feature - very interesting too. Finn has to do what he thinks is best as do the selectors.

I think it'll be a very bad idea to go in without a proper spinner almost on any track. Perth has tended to flatten out by day 3, unless England are thinking of a 3 day finish either way, they should certainly play one of Swann or Panesar. Has to be Swann in the end, but after due deliberations and observation in the net, it has to be a closer thing than many think.

The third man feature showed me two almost completely different bowlers. The first, a tall FAST bowler who is accurate, get's the batsmen jumping about and tucking them up, hitting the stumps and being hostile. the second just a rather tall, mid pace bowler getting hit everywhere. Finn has to do what is best for his career and that is to go back to the shortened run up where he had great success and looked a world class, fast bowler England are crying out for. He didn't even hit the stumps with that shortened run up either, even more reason to revert back to it.

Can't see the likeliness of either side ditching a spinner.

The extra bounce and the Fremantle Doctor helps spinners at the WACA.

Rankin is a unknown. Not really seem anything special about him.

Finn used to bowl quick, if he can still bowl 145kph+ get him into the side.

Bresnan medium paced. Won't offer much at the WACA.

The Finn run up thing reminds me of Simon Jones when he first broke into the England team. They changed his run up as they felt it put too much strain on his body and he initially lost potency as a result. I know injuries did for him anyway but that was because Gabba grass grows on sand and not soil . When he effective in the 2005 ashes he was back to his gentle medium paces stroll up to the wicket before bowling most of his deliveries around the 85mph mark!

Does the ball reverse in Perth? If yes then you could argue there is more of a case for selecting Bresnan maybe. Personally I would like to see Finn but only if he is up on pace. Unfortunately don't think Tremlet is the way forward because of his lack of pace. I think I agree with Stella's team in the original op. Nothing like ideal but the best available considering. Fact remains that unless at least 3 of Cook, KP, Bell, Anderson & Swann find some form then nothing will change.

Cook, Carberry, Root, KP, Bell, Ballance, Prior, Bresnan, Broad, Swann, Anderson.

Don't stop believing.

Tweet from Freddie Flintoff -
@flintoff11
On the bright side at this rate people will forget 2006/7 series @MichaelVaughan ! #whatseries

Yah, it's that bad.

Always good to follow Freddie's account. It's worth it for gems like:

"A pigs orgasm lasts for 30 minutes ! Good night x"

Well I never! Or:

"The penalty for masturbation in Indonesia is decapitation ! Good night x "

Don't ever try that then.

This test series is turning out great so far   

Come on Australia keep it up you can win it fellas 

guildfordbat wrote:

Liam wrote:Bring Finn in, yes he may be expensive but i'd rather we throw a bit of caution to the wind rather than play it safe with Bresnan. However, i am concerned with Finn's pace. In the summer vs the Aussies, it was right back down to mid to low 80's. Last night Botham did a 3rd man highlighting his short run up and how he bowled at 90mph, got plenty of bounce but more importantly, was accurate. I have no idea why he's reverted back to his old technique, because he becomes less quick and less accurate. Needs to go back to his short run up. If its a case of what you feel more comfortable with = less pace and less accuracy or don't feel as comfortable but bowl quicker and more accurate I know what one i'd be picking!!!

Liam - I saw that Third Man feature, good and interesting one. Atherton's comment immediately afterwards was key for me and rather worrying, along the lines of ''Perhaps Finn doesn't know at the moment what he's most comfortable with.''

It's something they did with Anderson at the start of his career, changing his run up, in the end he just overruled them all and did what he felt best. I feel Finn needs to do the same, take control himself and concentrate on bowling the ball accurately with pace.

Swann over Monty for me. Monty did ok, Swann not so good, but Swann is the better bowler, added onto the fact he isn't horrific in the field (as shown by the catching), and can bat a bit.

Agree with JDizzle. Stokes really looked like a good prospect. Certainly he's got a bit of attitude about him (which can go both ways, look at what happened to him last winter...), but there's something there to work with. I was impressed by his bowling, which I didn't think was as quick as it was. In an ideal world you'd move Prior up to 6, and Stokes at 7, but with Prior's form sketchy at best, I can't see it happening.

At the end of the day what we need is our senior players to perform. Cook, KP, Swann, Anderson, Prior, the core of our side, very inconsistent and poor so far. Has to change if we are to have any hope of somehow dragging ourselves out of this mess

guildfordbat wrote:

Hoggy_Bear wrote:Seems strange doesn't it that after 3 and a half terrible batting performances most of the talk on here and in the press seems to revolve around which bowling changes should be made for the next test. Is that an indica

tion that, as far as batting is concerned, England don't really have any real depth?

Hoggy - just caught up with a recording of the Breakfast highlights on SKY. Alec Stewart highlighted the batting woes and, whilst suggesting that the top five remain ''as is'',  he speculated on bringing in Ballance at 6 to lengthen the batting and have Stokes and Prior both dropping down a place to 7 and 8 respectively. His final three at 9, 10 and Jack in this scenario were Bresnan, Broad and Anderson.

Stewart was clearly uncomfortable about leaving out Swann - ''unthinkable'' until recently he said - but thought it might have to be the way forward for the selectors. However, Stewart was certain about Bresnan's inclusion - ''Bresnan will definitely come in. That's just a given.''

Surprised by a lot of that and don't agree with it much but food for thought.

Well now isn't that what I've been saying all along ? Except I would rather Bairstow than Ballance , but same principle...

If we can't bowl them out with four bowlers in Perth we're dead anyway , and we need all the batting we can get.

there are murmurs to include Tymal Mills for Perth....to match fire with fire.

It requires an Imran Khan thouhg to make such things happen

Not a chance of Mills playing. He's as wild as a bull in a china shop that only sells red china.

Is Flower dropping a hint that Swann will be dropped today? He is quoted as saying there will be changes and he's not afraid to make tough decisions. That sounds like he is thinking of dropping one of the mainstays of the team and the obvious one that springs to mind is Graeme Swann.

Fists of Fury wrote:Not a chance of Mills playing. He's as wild as a bull in a china shop that only sells red china.

that kinda sums up the English approach.......they would never throw a wild card with high potential into the cauldron of a test match....I remeber they brouhgt Meaker to India and I heard similar comments.

Akram, Waqar, Amir were all plucked out even more raw