What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

2ND ASHES TEST: England v Australia at Lord's Jul 18-22, 2013

oldmancraigy

Coach
Messages
11,505
1 - Hughes
2 - Rogers
3 - Khawaja
4 - Watson
5 - Clarke
6 - Smith
7 - Haddin
8 - Pattinson
9 - Agar
10 - Siddle
11 - Bird

would be the side I'd be happy with for the second test, out of the available squad.

Hughes can't play spin to save his life, get him batting early, he might jag a few more 50's before Swann arrives and makes him his bitch. Watson need to be batting around 5-7, but Clarke is better at 5.

Bird in for Starc. Pattinson needs to start bowling more consistently and build pressure, or he can be dropped too.

Agreed- Hughes ought to face pace. He doesn't seem to have a run scoring shot against spinners. Needs Hayden to teach him how to sweep effectively?

Watson at 4 is irrelevant I suppose - he doesn't score runs anywhere except as an opener, and only then when he faces the first ball.
Hughes averages 50 when facing the first ball of the match - but since he's made 3 half centuries at number 3, it's probably worth giving Watto the first ball so he can at least make 40 runs.
Rogers is worth persevering with for this tour IMO.
 

Jono1987

Juniors
Messages
1,520
1. Watson
2. Rogers
3. Hughes
4. Clarke
5. Smith
6. Haddin
7. Agar
8. Harris/Bird
9. Siddle
10. Starc
11. Pattinson

Call me crazy but if we want to win this series I believe we beef up our strength (bowling) and keep England to 250-300 and hope that the batsmen up their game, even if it only is by a small margin.
 

TheParraboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
66,456
1. Watson
2. Rogers
3. Hughes
4. Clarke
5. Smith
6. Haddin
7. Agar
8. Harris/Bird
9. Siddle
10. Starc
11. Pattinson

Call me crazy but if we want to win this series I believe we beef up our strength (bowling) and keep England to 250-300 and hope that the batsmen up their game, even if it only is by a small margin.

Yup I d be going with that sort of lineup, we need to pressure their batting every over, if someone is leaking a bit, take him off, bring in a fresh bowler. Short sharp bursts

We lose this test we have no hope of then winning 3 in a row to regain the ashes.

Glory or bust at Lords
 
Messages
21,875
1. Watson
2. Rogers
3. Hughes
4. Clarke
5. Smith
6. Haddin
7. Agar
8. Harris/Bird
9. Siddle
10. Starc
11. Pattinson

Call me crazy but if we want to win this series I believe we beef up our strength (bowling) and keep England to 250-300 and hope that the batsmen up their game, even if it only is by a small margin.



If Watson is bowling there is no need for 5 specialist bowlers.

Huge overkill.

More bowlers does not equal bowling an opposition out for less.

More batsmen though generally means more runs.
 

Twizzle

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
151,350
we didn't make enough runs, the last thing I'd be doing is going with less bastmen

we bowled them out twice without busting our arses, why do we need more bowlers ?
 

VictoryFC

Bench
Messages
3,786
Bird's omission as a bowler who would profit dearly in England can only be explained by his batting. Siddle, Pattinson, Starc are all more proficient with the bat. I think having a long tail was a big part of it, and in many its been vindicated. Might have lost by an innings without the tail.

Anyone who watched Bird last summer would have kept one eye on the Ashes. Good and consistent line and length. McGrath-eqsue. But again, unless the top/middle order start performing consistently, there is a lot of sense in selecting someone like Starc over him.
 

Valheru

Coach
Messages
17,869
re: thoughts of selecting Lyon.
No. No. No. No. No.
Agar doesn't need to take a wicket to offer more than Lyon. He can field, and he can score runs. The point of having a spinner is for "variety". Agar offers that while keeping one end tight - he only went at 2.5 per over in that test match.
For his first class career, Agar boasts a better strike rate, economy rate, and average to Nathan Lyon. And he's already had a 5 wicket haul in a first class game (Nathan Lyon is yet to record a domestic 5-fer).
Anyone who thinks Lyon offers anything is mad. This year he's been going at 4.5 per over, and barely troubled the scorers in the wicket taking department. The bloke is fence fodder, and unable to either field or bat well enough to make a contribution on those fronts.
Given that we don't have a spinner who can challenge at international level, if we MUST have one, why not go with the bloke who might score some runs, and contribute in the field? And if that bloke happens to have a vastly superior first class record....


Yeah, no.

This is test cricket and the point of having any bowler is take wickets. ?Variety? is for the shortened form of the game.

As I said earlier, they need to decide what Agar is in the team for, the last thing a front line spinner should be selected on is batting and that is an indictment on our top order. Agar is clearly an all rounder and either he or Smith should be selected or another specialist batsmen dropped f they want both.

If Lyon isn?t the best spin option then so be it, there are other options.
 
Messages
21,875
Bird's omission as a bowler who would profit dearly in England can only be explained by his batting. Siddle, Pattinson, Starc are all more proficient with the bat. I think having a long tail was a big part of it, and in many its been vindicated. Might have lost by an innings without the tail.

Anyone who watched Bird last summer would have kept one eye on the Ashes. Good and consistent line and length. McGrath-eqsue. But again, unless the top/middle order start performing consistently, there is a lot of sense in selecting someone like Starc over him.



All things being equal that might be the case.

But we select the best bowlers first.

I seriously doubt we would consider a lesser bowler just because he might be more handy with the bat.


Bird not playing in the first test is nothing more than a seniority thing imo.

He looked great against Sri Lanka , but its very early days.
 
Messages
21,875


Yeah, no.

This is test cricket and the point of having any bowler is take wickets. ?Variety? is for the shortened form of the game.

As I said earlier, they need to decide what Agar is in the team for, the last thing a front line spinner should be selected on is batting and that is an indictment on our top order. Agar is clearly an all rounder and either he or Smith should be selected or another specialist batsmen dropped f they want both.

If Lyon isn?t the best spin option then so be it, there are other options.



So , what if Agar is the best spin option and also very handy with the bat?
 
Messages
21,875
then its a no brainer

big IF tho



Its not that big an IF.


We dont exactly have a good spinner lying around.


Lyon has been ok as far as an off spinner goes.

O'Keefe should have had a go by now , but looks to be locked out of the team.



Agar looks more than capable of at least equaling Lyon's performances.
 

VictoryFC

Bench
Messages
3,786
Lyon has actually been far more than ok.

76 wickets at 33.18 with a 63.6 SR over the past 2 years (22 matches).
 
Messages
21,875
Lyon has actually been far more than ok.

76 wickets at 33.18 with a 63.6 SR over the past 2 years (22 matches).



No , thats about Par. And you neglect his economy rate , which is way too high for a spinner @ 3.12

and an off spinner should be keeping it much tighter than that.



I'm not a Lyon hater by any means , I think he's been our best since warne.


But I think Agar can match those stats.
 

Jono1987

Juniors
Messages
1,520
If Watson is bowling there is no need for 5 specialist bowlers.

Huge overkill.

More bowlers does not equal bowling an opposition out for less.

More batsmen though generally means more runs.

As Parraboy alluded to get the bowlers bowling short, sharp spells. Don't let the English batsmen get comfortable facing any one bowler. If a bowler is releasing pressure (like Starc was prone to doing) get him off. Watson wouldn't need to bowl using my line-up. I don't think anyone could rely on Watson to contribute with the ball consistently. I realise batsmen scoring runs was our primary problem in the first test but I simply picked the best possible eleven we could field (imo).

We've heard that the weather is expected to be good throughout the series, so generally batting should be easier than you would normally expect in England. If I was going to tinker with my line-up I would say drop Smith (even though he played fairly well) for Khawaja and move Clarke down one spot to 5. For mine Agar showed enough promise with ball and bat to be selected as the all-rounder and play well at 7 (or as much as you can show after one test). That and both tails produced runs, adding another batsmen may add runs but what happens if one of our bowlers is having a bad day? Or worse yet get's injured? Hypothetical situations I know but I picked an attacking side. We won't win by being conservative.
 

typicalfan

Coach
Messages
15,430
In the modern game your tail needs to be able to hold the bat. It wasnt a lack of bowling skill that cost us. It was the bowlers that kept us in the game.
 
Messages
21,875
As Parraboy alluded to get the bowlers bowling short, sharp spells. Don't let the English batsmen get comfortable facing any one bowler. If a bowler is releasing pressure (like Starc was prone to doing) get him off. Watson wouldn't need to bowl using my line-up. I don't think anyone could rely on Watson to contribute with the ball consistently. I realise batsmen scoring runs was our primary problem in the first test but I simply picked the best possible eleven we could field (imo).

We've heard that the weather is expected to be good throughout the series, so generally batting should be easier than you would normally expect in England. If I was going to tinker with my line-up I would say drop Smith (even though he played fairly well) for Khawaja and move Clarke down one spot to 5. For mine Agar showed enough promise with ball and bat to be selected as the all-rounder and play well at 7 (or as much as you can show after one test). That and both tails produced runs, adding another batsmen may add runs but what happens if one of our bowlers is having a bad day? Or worse yet get's injured? Hypothetical situations I know but I picked an attacking side. We won't win by being conservative.


Watson can perform consistently with the ball no problem.

Its his consistency of being able to bowl at all that is the problem.

But if he's fit going in to the match , that's all that you can really go on.


Selecting 5 bowlers would be a major fail. Short , sharp spells won't necessarily result in quicker wickets being taken.
 

Horrie Is God

First Grade
Messages
8,073
http://www.foxsports.com.au/cricket/the-ashes/england-strongly-reject-claims-that-spinner-graeme-swann-tampered-with-the-ball-during-first-test/story-e6frf3gl-1226680573834#.UeYnutJHI_s

England strongly reject claims that spinner Graeme Swann tampered with the ball during first Test..

Malcolm Conn and Richard Earle News Limited Network July 17, 2013 9:43AM

THE England and Wales Cricket Board have denied spinner Graeme Swann tampered with the ball in the first Test at Trent Bridge.

Dean Jones told Melbourne radio station 3AW footage showing Swann crouching behind an esky and applying spray to his hands "definitely needs to be clarified."

An ECB spokeswoman said suggestions Swann had attempted to alter the condition of the ball were erroneous.

"The answer to the question is no he wasn't tampering with the ball, all he was doing was drying his hands,” the spokeswoman said.

"As you know the umpires check the ball at every break in play and at no stage have any concerns been raised."

Jones said clarification was required over exactly what substance Swann was applying to his hands.

"In my time we used to spray methylated spirits on our calluses, and that's ok," Jones told 3AW.

"But it definitely needs to be clarified what he was spraying. If you noticed (Stuart) Broad gave him a funny look when he did it.

"I just wonder why he was doing it discreetly instead of just standing up and spraying away."

Meanwhile, Swann has put a spin on villain Stuart Broad's DRS deceit that ignited the first Test `howler' storm at Trent Bridge - inviting claims of hypocrisy.

It was Swann who admitted he 'wanted' to kill unheralded Sri Lankan batsman Dilruwan Perera in March last year for failing to walk during a tour match at Premadasa Stadium.

Pakistan umpire Aleem Dar, fasting through Ramadan, missed Broad's thick edge off debutant Ashton Agar when on 37 to Michael Clarke at first slip in England's second innings at Trent Bridge.

However Swann won't condemn shamed, 58-Test paceman Broad who confused Dar with a poker face and made 65 vital runs in a Test England won by 14 runs.

"I think it is very harsh to shine the light just on Broady - there were probably six or seven batsmen who didn't walk at Trent Bridge when they nicked the ball,'' Swann said.

Swann noted Australian vice-captain Brad Haddin and skipper Michael Clarke also declined to walk for dismissals in Nottingham proving "virtually no batsmen around the world walk".

"I've always said I believe batsmen should walk. But in a high-stakes game like an Ashes Test, it is human nature that people are going to stand their ground and use the argument that umpires are there to makes decisions - so let them do so,'' Swann told The Sun.

On England's tour of Sri Lanka Perera merely stood his ground not knowing if a catch had carried to former skipper Andrew Strauss off spearhead James Anderson. Tailender Perera was subjected to prolonged verbal abuse from England opposition incensed by cricket's cheating culture.

"I wanted to kill the batsman because he was cheating and was stood next to me with a smug look on his face!'' said Swann of the Perera incident that tainted England's innings and 115-run win in Colombo against the Sri Lankan board XI.

"The thing that annoyed me was that the batsman stood there knowing 100 per cent he was out but chose to cheat. He then opened himself up to the level of abuse that was coming to him.''

Yet, Swann believes Broad - old and experienced enough to know better - deserves to be spared rebuff for his actions in the Ashes opener.

The premier tweaker's view contrasts with former England skipper Michael Vaughan who predicts Broad will be remembered as a `cheat' while a home Nottingham crowd also jeered the baby faced speedster.
 

Horrie Is God

First Grade
Messages
8,073
http://www.foxsports.com.au/cricket/the-ashes/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-venue-for-the-second-ashes-test-lords-in-london/story-e6frf3gl-1226679653822#.UeYqPNJHI_s

WITH the first Test under our belts, we take a look at the venue where Australia will look to get their Ashes campaign back on track..

Lord's

City guide

London's history is an often-told tale. First established in 43AD its population rose under the Romans and dwindled on their departure, and it was not until the 12th century that the city was properly established as England's capital. The 14th century's devastating Black Death and the Great Plague of 1665 killed thousands of Londoners, but by the Victorian era numbers in the city had begun an inexorable rise which shows little sign of abating even today: according to the 2011 census, there were 8,174,000 inhabitants of Greater London, making it comfortably the European Union's largest conurbation. From Roman to Saxon, Viking to Norman, London has received many an unwelcome visitor through the ages, but today the city embraces immigrant workers from all parts of the world. Australians are as keen as anyone to visit - in 2011 the capital's 'cobber' community was a cricket squad short of 54,000 - and the familiar 'Aussie, Aussie, Aussie' chorus will be out in force again at Lord's and The Oval this summer.

The Ground

Next year will mark the 200th anniversary of the first game at Lord's - at least in its current incarnation. The ground owes its history and its name to one Thomas Lord, an enterprising 18th century go-getter initially tasked with finding a more central venue for Islington's White Conduit Club cricket side. Lord identified a site on what is now Dorset Square and, in 1787, staged a match there for the first time. So the Marylebone Cricket Club was born, and the new organisation quickly made itself guardian of the laws of cricket - a position it holds to this day. Lord sought to escape rising rent demands by relocating to St John's Wood in 1811, and when the Regent's Canal was routed through the site of the second Lord's three years later the MCC was on the move again. The third Lord's Ground remains home, although its founder's thirst for new opportunity came close to forcing a fourth move in 1825. A stick-in-the-mud reputation often pinned on MCC members has not been reflected in the often bold redevelopments undergone by the 'home of cricket'. The Grade II listed grandeur of the 1890 pavilion sits incongruously alongside the tented canopies of the 1987 Mound Stand and the futuristic marshmallow-shaped media centre, which opened in 1999. Somehow the mish-mash of styles seems to work for even the most conservative spectator. Four further stands are due for a revamp over the next 10 years as the cycle continues, all under the watchful eye of Old Father Time, the famous weather vane donted to the MCC in 1926.

Pitch report
Lord's has built a reputation as a results pitch in recent years after emerging from its record run of six drawn matches between 2006 and 2008. Just one of 10 subsequent Tests has failed to yield a winner, and the arena has traditionally provided help for seam and swing bowling: James Anderson and Stuart Broad are among the English pacemen who comprise the top five Test wicket-takers at headquarters. Spin bowlers are far from redundant - witness Graeme Swann's 31 wickets in nine Lord's appearances - but it is the quicks who tend to flourish or falter on the famous slope. The outfield falls more than two metres from north-west to south-east, across the strip, and some deal better than others with the peculiar demands of approaching the wicket on a slanted surface. Wasim Akram, for example, failed to get on the Lord's honours board despite his 414 Test wickets, whereas Glenn McGrath's three trips to St John's Wood brought 26 victims. McGrath is long gone, of course, and the good news for England is that the current undisputed king of Lord's is among their number: almost a quarter of Broad's 195 Test wickets, 47 in all, have come there.

Ashes history

The home of English cricket has provided precious little comfort for England sides in recent Ashes memory. Take out the 2009 victory, when Andrew Strauss's first-innings hundred and Andrew Flintoff's memorable final-morning marathon with the ball inspired a 115-run success, and you have to venture into thickly-cobwebbed archive territory to find England's last Lord's win. That came in 1934, when left-arm spinner Hedley Verity recorded a career-best 15-104 and briefly stifled Sir Donald Bradman's vintage, although the tourists went on to win the series 2-1. A run of four successive draws in the late '70s and early 80s briefly kept the Aussies at arm's length, but since 1985 St John's Wood has hosted seven Ashes Tests and five have been won by the visitors. Highlights during that time, for Australians at least, include Glenn McGrath's 8-38 in 1997 and Mike Atherton's infamous 1993 run out one short of a century.
 

Latest posts

Top