**The Official England vs Australia Ashes Series Thread****

[The Fratton Roar]

Originally Posted by hanuma

pietersen is zulu 2....yay we have a klusener

i know this might sound ridiculous but why not have thorpe AND pietersen in the team?

tresco
strauss
vaughn
pietersen
flintoff
thorpe
jones
giles
harmison
gough
andersen/hoggard

thats a long batting order...but tbh our bowling attack is never going to be vastly improved by including an extra bowler....may aswell stock up on the batting....we might need it if mcgrath, warne and gillespie are in form.

This looks like you're picking a team for a One-Day game, but Thorpe's retired from ODIs. It's the Test team that the debate circles around, and it continues to circle because of the flawless performances of Ian Bell since he arrived in the team - three innings, of 70, 65 not out, and 162 not out so far, albeit against weak opposition, but it's still not grounds for dropping.

Thorpe and Pietersen could only play in the same side if a) Bell was dropped, seeing as Trescothick, Vaughan, and Strauss will not be, or b) if England were to sacrifice a bowler. This would be a negative and backward step IMO, because to win a Test, you've got to take 20 wickets, and with four bowlers only you're never going to take 20 wickets against Australia, not unless there's a superhuman performance from somebody.

Giles has got to be there as the spinner, Harmison as the spearhead, Hoggard as Mr Reliable, and Simon Jones because he is now starting to show signs of fulfilling the potential he has always had (and the Australians rate him, so there's a bit of fear factor there). It goes without saying that you can't drop Flintoff.

The debate isn't really "Should Kevin Pietersen be in the England Test side?", because there's no doubt that he should - the debate is "Who could England justifiably drop to fit Pietersen in?". The answer is no-one, so he stays out for the time being.

And as you've mentioned James Anderson, he's taken about five backward steps per week since he first came into the England side - he can no longer get swing in clear conditions, he can't bowl six balls on the same spot, he can't move the ball off a flat pitch - basically he's got rubbish (he played one Test in South Africa over the winter and got carted all over the place), so England have sent him back to county cricket to learn how to play again and get some confidence back. It'll be a while before he's playing for England again, but hopefully when he does come back, he'll be a better player for it.

[The Fratton Roar]

Originally Posted by hanuma

what about vs south africa...i mean comeon dude...every time he has been challenged he has taken the challenge on and won.

you dont always get experienced ex pros comparing young players to great players....thats normally left to the journos.

I'm not saying he shouldn't be in the team - merely that Thorpe should, and there's no-one else you can drop. Read my other post above. It's a shame that we can't fit him in, but that's the way things are sometimes.

[hanuma]

i agree with you...not just because your clearly more knowledgable, but because i have just been to cricinfo to read up

so how would your test 11 look?

[Ben_W]

I would have Pietersen in the squad at least, though it's harsh as Fratton said to drop Thorpe, and also Bell. He needs to be in the squad at least though. A side with Pietersen, Flintoff, G Jones and Giles in the middle order could be brilliant. The question is whether you drop Thorpe from 3/4 and have Bell there next to Vaughan, or drop Bell and play Thorpe. You can't accomodate Pietersen if we're playing those two and Giles as the spinner.

[The Fratton Roar]

Originally Posted by hanuma

i agree with you...not just because your clearly more knowledgable

Cheers hanny!

My Test XI would look pretty much like the team does now - except if Simon Jones' injury that he picked up the other day persists, I'd pick Chris Tremlett, and I don't particularly rate Geraint Jones - there's a top young 'keeper/batsman at Sussex called Matt Prior, I'd like to see him get a chance. Saw him bat live the other week and he was fantastic.

Trescothick
Strauss
Vaughan
Bell
Thorpe
Flintoff
Prior
Giles
Hoggard
S Jones (Tremlett if he's injured)
Harmison

With Pietersen to come in the moment any of our batsmen pick up a niggling injury. Trouble is, during the Ashes, it's always the quick bowlers that pick up the injuries - bad luck at important times is a bitch.

[hanuma]

i agree with your lineup, i would like it if strauss could bat further down the order.

do you reckon pieterson could be an opener when he comes in? or would that be a waste?

[The Fratton Roar]

Originally Posted by hanuma

i agree with your lineup, i would like it if strauss could bat further down the order.

do you reckon pieterson could be an opener when he comes in? or would that be a waste?

Being an opener at first-class or Test match level is very much a specialist discipline - less so in the One-Day game, but it still requires different skills. It's far more common for an opener to move down the order than for someone else to move up, but it still doesn't happen very often. Vaughan moved down the order to allow Strauss to open with Trescothick, because Strauss was picked as an opener, and it took the pressure off Vaughan a little as captain. Strauss won't move down the order until either England find another opener good enough to replace him, or the middle order becomes severely weakened for some reason in the future. He was picked as an opener, he's succeeded as an opener, and there's no logical reason why he'd move down the order just yet.

Pietersen, on the other hand, will never be an opener in any format of the game (except possibly Twenty20) - he's just got the wrong style of play. His aggressive hitting is far more useful in the late overs, when a team tries to up the run rate to around 7 or 8 an over for the last 8-12 overs, depending on the situation. That's why he bats at 6 for England with Flintoff at 5 - the plan is, use Tresco and Strauss to get off to a solid start, keep it ticking over with Vaughan and Collingwood in the middle overs, and then let Flintoff and Pietersen come in at 5 and 6 with 20 overs left and play themselves in before they start smashing the bowling everywhere.

Pietersen would indeed be wasted as an opener, especially in Test matches - as an opener, you have to have a patient enough mentality to gauge what the pitch and conditions are like, as well as what the bowlers are doing, before you make a decision as to what style of play is necessary. Openers have to be more adaptable, so Pietersen won't ever be one, unless he has a complete personality transplant! He's just too aggressive - some openers like to take the attack to the bowlers, but they are generally the ones who will smash a quick 70 one day and get bowled for 3 the next. You need stability in your openers, that's what success is built on - preferably a fairly aggressive stability, but certainly not the kind of abandon Pietersen plays with. Marcus Trescothick is pretty much the model of an international One-Day opener (aggressive, yet calm and controlled), with Michael Atherton having been the model of a Test match opener (gritty, patient, adaptable, determined and frustratingly tough to dismiss). Hope that clears things up.

[NJ10]

btw i dont rate the wicket keeper jones at all. i think he's bollox.

[The Fratton Roar]

Originally Posted by NJ10

btw i dont rate the wicket keeper jones at all. i think he's bollox.

Well that's one way of putting it.......

[premfan]

Originally Posted by The Fratton Roar

The fact that SA conceded 317 to Chris Gayle is a little embarrassing, although he is a very good player and the wicket was pretty much the flattest in Test history.

Why? He is a fantastic player and he was the one batsman for WI that was consistant. But yeah S.A bowling attack is still a bit inexperienced and if they could find a Brett Lee or Shane Bond it wouldn't hurt. They have a tall black guy called Mafineko Ngam who bowls faster than Lee and can hit the deck at a 100 miles an hour, but unfortunately he is forever injured! He was trained by Donald.

Klusener still plays, taking wickets and hitting 100's but at his age and the emergance of Justin Kemp his chances are slim. What S.A need is a solid number three. At the moment that position is rotated between Rudolph and Dippenaar, both fantastic batsman but both slightly inconsistent. What they could do with is another Jonty Rhodes, the kind of player that can motivate any team to victory just with attitude!

[premfan]

[quote=The Fratton Roar
Trescothick
Strauss
Vaughan
Bell
Thorpe
Flintoff
Prior
Giles
Hoggard
S Jones (Tremlett if he's injured)
Harmison

[/QUOTE]

Thats a solid team! Are you sure your not a selector?
What about Kabir Ali? Is he mainly a one day player? I was very impressed with him in S.A, fast and held a consistent line! The S.A team pretty much picks itself, but here is my 11 for them.

G.Smith
AB.DeVilliars
J.Rudolph
J.Kallis
H.Gibbs
A.Prince
M.Boucher
S.Pollock
N.Boye or J.Kemp (Depending on the wicket)
M.Ntini
C.Langerveld or A.Nel

[The Fratton Roar]

Originally Posted by premfan

Why?

I only said that on the principle that it's a little embarrassing for any team to concede a triple century to anyone! I've seen Chris Gayle live and he is a stunningly destructive batsman, superb to watch.

Originally Posted by premfan

What about Kabir Ali? Is he mainly a one day player? I was very impressed with him in S.A, fast and held a consistent line! The S.A team pretty much picks itself, but here is my 11 for them.

I rate Kabir Ali very highly, and his performances in the SA ODIs were good, as well as his performance in the one Test he has played. However, the general concensus in England is that while he is a talented bowler, he is still a little too inconsistent to be considered as a front-line bowler for England at the time being. He is in the ODI squad but not the team, and hasn't been selected in a Test squad since his debut in 2003 despite taking five wickets (2 1st innings, 3nd innings) in his one game. He has a lot of potential, but still has some developing to do.

As for your SA team, it looks very strong - the fact that Justin Kemp could end up batting no9 is testament to the batting depth in SA cricket, a lot of strong all-rounders available. Perhaps you could explain to me why Martin van Jaarsveld no longer seems to be in the reckoning for SA - I've always rated him, and he's been scoring hundred after hundred in domestic cricket over here this season, but he still doesn't seem to be in the hun for a place in the middle order. Perhaps it was Gibbs' move to no5 (great decision by the way) which kicked him out?

[premfan]

Originally Posted by The Fratton Roar

Perhaps you could explain to me why Martin van Jaarsveld no longer seems to be in the reckoning for SA - I've always rated him, and he's been scoring hundred after hundred in domestic cricket over here this season, but he still doesn't seem to be in the hun for a place in the middle order. Perhaps it was Gibbs' move to no5 (great decision by the way) which kicked him out?

Yes Gibbs shift down the order had a lot to do with that. I read an article a while back by Graeme Pollock I believe, that spoke about S.A's problem at number 3. He saw Van Jaarsveld as a possible answer to those problems, but beyond that I have no idea if he could sustain a place in that position. You know how difficult it is to bat there. He has opened the batting for S.A and did alright, but the problem is so many batsman show so much promise but when the chance is given they choke. Van Jaarsveld is one of those. A prime example is Adam Bacher! Domestic cricket he is rated as one of the best with an average in the high 50's but every time he plays for S.A he gets out quick. He scored a shaky 50 recently against Banglidesh for S.A after hitting a stylish 100 for the Srtikers against England. Its a mental thing !

[The Fratton Roar]

Originally Posted by premfan

Its a mental thing !

Seems like that's the problem with a lot of SA cricketers these days - you could make an entire XI of SA players in recent years which, in different circumstances in terms of confidence problems, injuries etc, could be an extremely strong Test side.

Duminy
Van Jaarsveld
Dippenaar
McKenzie
Bacher
Ontong
Van Wyk
Peterson
Pretorius
Ngam
Willoughby

Not sure if Mfuneko Ngam has actually played any international cricket yet, but he's a great prospect by all accounts, just blighted by injuries as you mentioned before, much like our very own Simon Jones. I've always thought Dewald "Devious" Pretorius was a much better bowler than a lot of people gave him credit for, too.

[hanuma]

this has had an excellent response.....and clearly lots of cricket knowledge here guys......very intersting for me to read....especially because i am relearning my second favourite sport

should we have a forum for 'other sports'.....i think a 'cricket' forum would be pushing it a little.