Great innings by Joyce. Not afraid to take the aerial route. Him and Loye did well in the first 10 overs. Hopefully they'll get some games together at the top. Strauss actually hitting the ball in front of square for once and did a lot better, still a lot to do if he's gonna save his position when Pietersen or Vaughan come back. Dalrymple was excellent till he forgot to run, after collingwoods place.
Ashes thread - England vs Australia * SPOILERS *
- Thread starter Compound
- Start date
I've got a couple of complaints. Why was Flintoff bowling Panesar at the death? Thats a job for the quickies, shirley. Bracken racked up 22 runs, Clarke 15 .. Shaun Harmis.. sorry, Shaun Tait 11, despite coming in AFTER McGrath (Christ that tells you everything about his batting)
So instead of annihilating the opposition all out for say 170-180 it ended up 200. Every run counts. Just because they're the tail doesnt mean you should drop your guard. If anything you should focus more and tighten the noose further to finish the game off.
So instead of annihilating the opposition all out for say 170-180 it ended up 200. Every run counts. Just because they're the tail doesnt mean you should drop your guard. If anything you should focus more and tighten the noose further to finish the game off.
Table of top English wicket takers for this series
Code:
Name Mat O M R W Ave Best 4w 5w SR Econ
JM Anderson 4 37 5 165 8 20.62 4-42 1 - 27.7 4.45
A Flintoff 7 56.4 4 268 7 38.28 4-21 1 - 48.5 4.72
LE Plunkett 3 23.5 1 117 6 19.50 3-24 - - 23.8 4.90
MS Panesar 6 54 3 244 6 40.66 2-35 - - 54.0 4.51
J Lewis 4 37.2 4 161 5 32.20 4-36 1 - 44.8 4.31
PD Collingwood 6 28 1 122 4 30.50 2-25 - - 42.0 4.35
SI Mahmood 1 7 0 38 2 19.00 2-38 - - 21.0 5.42
RS Bopara 1 4 0 19 1 19.00 1-19 - - 24.0 4.75
JWM Dalrymple 7 21 1 114 1 114.00 1-38 - - 126.0 5.42
CT Tremlett 3 28.3 0 154 1 154.00 1-72 - - 171.0 5.40That table shows how much Anderson improved as the games went on as he was being smacked around at the start and now has 8 at 20's. Panesar doing a decent job now they've decided to trust him in ODI's. From them stats you'd say Tremlett isn't quite ready, would personally have Broad in his place.
We did bowl well today although got away with a few. There were some wide deliveries from Mahmood and Plunkett if they cut them down they could be dangerous bowlers, Mahmood especially. Bopara could turn out to be a useful player, would like to see how he does in another match or two.
Same team for the next game for me. With Joyce doing very well and Loye giving us a new dimension at the top Strauss and Collingwoods places seem under threat.
We did bowl well today although got away with a few. There were some wide deliveries from Mahmood and Plunkett if they cut them down they could be dangerous bowlers, Mahmood especially. Bopara could turn out to be a useful player, would like to see how he does in another match or two.
Same team for the next game for me. With Joyce doing very well and Loye giving us a new dimension at the top Strauss and Collingwoods places seem under threat.
Last edited:
Pretty much the same story for Plunkett it would seem. Got smacked around first match, 7.8 runs per over at Adelaide I believe but now he's got 6 for 20 in 3 games.
Now if this is what we can expect of Plunkett and Anderson on a regular basis then we're potentially looking at lethal ODI bowling options with Anderson, Plunkett, Lewis and Flintoff. I'd also bet on Panesar adapting his bowling to the ODI format, too. Having an economical wicket taking spinner would really be the icing on the cake as far as a lethal bowling line up goes. This is what we should be striving for.
Definitely agree with you that the team shouldnt be changed, unless conditions favour it. Never change a winning team.
I also found it incredible how having some runs at the top of the order seemed to give so much life to the lower order. Strauss was playing some outrageous shots in comparison to what hes been doing lately. Dalrymple was really giving it some welly too, I really enjoyed watching him make that 30.
5 of the 6 batsmen are now probably in the stages of being finalised. Joyce and Loye are probably going to open. Bell and KP are obviously dead certs. And if Vaughan is fit they will slot him in there. So it comes down to Strauss, Collingwood, Dalrymple and Bopara all fighting for the last place. Strauss doesnt bowl so he is absolutely 100% to lose a place, IMO, because they arent going to have just the 1 allrounder in Flintoff. They'll want another bits and pieces player like Collingwood, Dalrymple or Bopara.
Now if this is what we can expect of Plunkett and Anderson on a regular basis then we're potentially looking at lethal ODI bowling options with Anderson, Plunkett, Lewis and Flintoff. I'd also bet on Panesar adapting his bowling to the ODI format, too. Having an economical wicket taking spinner would really be the icing on the cake as far as a lethal bowling line up goes. This is what we should be striving for.
Definitely agree with you that the team shouldnt be changed, unless conditions favour it. Never change a winning team.
I also found it incredible how having some runs at the top of the order seemed to give so much life to the lower order. Strauss was playing some outrageous shots in comparison to what hes been doing lately. Dalrymple was really giving it some welly too, I really enjoyed watching him make that 30.
5 of the 6 batsmen are now probably in the stages of being finalised. Joyce and Loye are probably going to open. Bell and KP are obviously dead certs. And if Vaughan is fit they will slot him in there. So it comes down to Strauss, Collingwood, Dalrymple and Bopara all fighting for the last place. Strauss doesnt bowl so he is absolutely 100% to lose a place, IMO, because they arent going to have just the 1 allrounder in Flintoff. They'll want another bits and pieces player like Collingwood, Dalrymple or Bopara.
Rosbif said:
Dont think that Lewis is up to much against class batsmen on a good pitch. Anderson and Plunkett are both "click" bowlers at the moment, and expensive when they dont. Mahmood, for the lack of anything between the ears, is still a better bet if something can be done about the consistency. He has some great balls and can cause trouble in the right areas.
Vaughn will not be fit, Strauss has no worries. Collingwood will be ok based on allround ptions, and Dalrymple will be in as a tie up spinner, making way maybe for Bopara or the like on green pitches. He`s bright and willing to be ugly enough to score difficult runs when it counts, and can open his shoulders when necessary. Will create pressure with the ball and buy others wickets, and so is generally worth his place over others.
The problem with bits and pieces bowlers is that they fall apart easily. Flintoff is the only class player to rely on, and he will not really be fit for another six months I dont think.
Associate
Well NZ got 290 with Australia now chasing with 12/0 after 4 overs. Apparently this is a high score at the MCG. England is screwed if NZ win, esp with a bonus point.
But about the last Eng v Aus, I have no doubt in my mind that Australia threw the match for the reason to knock NZ out of the final. Poor form indeed.
But about the last Eng v Aus, I have no doubt in my mind that Australia threw the match for the reason to knock NZ out of the final. Poor form indeed.
Soldato
Well the Aussies have done their part, they got that 291 with 10 balls to spare, 104 for Ponting and 99 for Brad Hodge so all we now need to do is beat New Zealand and we in the final...........to get 2 more tankings off Australia
Soldato
fumbles said:
Or maybe England just played well for once? The Aussies got off to a bad start in their innings with Gilchrist getting an unplayable Yorker and Hodge going early on as well. Would have been difficult for any team to come back from that.
Associate
Mad old tory said:
You don't find it odd that Australia after their winning streak that they loose miserably all of a sudden and then the next game they pick up from where they left off? It's just not cricket!
Soldato
No Ponting for a start in our game, plus we had them on the rocks for a little while in the last game against them when Hussey wasn't given out. NZ have run them close a coupe of times too, so it doesn't seem all that unbelievable that they get beat.
Man of Honour
I don't reckon loye will survive to open in the world cup unless he can find a 50 in him before england go home.
For the world cup I reckon it'll be (and here's sticking my neck out)
Joyce
Vaughan
Bell
Pieterson
Flintoff
Collingwood
Dalrymple
Nixon
Plunkett
Anderson
Panesar
The batsmen are reasonably obvious (though I'd dearly love to see a recovered tresco batting with joyce at the top of the order). Collingwood will stay as he's a useful all rounder on the right pitch and a great fielder.
Panesar should be safe, he's been pretty economical but his place could be vulnerable if they want 4 quicks and don't fancy nixon at 7. Anderson and plunkett are pretty much certain.
Really only one place is contested in that line up, either dalrymple or bopara as an all rounder or lewis as another bowler.
For the world cup I reckon it'll be (and here's sticking my neck out)
Joyce
Vaughan
Bell
Pieterson
Flintoff
Collingwood
Dalrymple
Nixon
Plunkett
Anderson
Panesar
The batsmen are reasonably obvious (though I'd dearly love to see a recovered tresco batting with joyce at the top of the order). Collingwood will stay as he's a useful all rounder on the right pitch and a great fielder.
Panesar should be safe, he's been pretty economical but his place could be vulnerable if they want 4 quicks and don't fancy nixon at 7. Anderson and plunkett are pretty much certain.
Really only one place is contested in that line up, either dalrymple or bopara as an all rounder or lewis as another bowler.
I'd have Loye in for Collingwood myself. His form since his 200 has been shocking at best. Think the powerplays in the conditions we'll be playing in will be vital.
Panesar definitely safe along with Dalrymple as we'll probably need the 2 spinners on those pitches.
Panesar definitely safe along with Dalrymple as we'll probably need the 2 spinners on those pitches.
Soldato
platty said:
His form hasn't been that good since the double hundred, but I'd always start with him, as he can bat, bowl and is one of the best fielders on this here planet of ours.
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 195
Collingwood is a difficult decision. He is a handy player when he is in form. The problem is that he is struggling at the moment. When he isn't getting out, he is getting bogged down at the crease and lowers the run-rate.
Loye is an interesting prospect. He is a decent player with some unothordox strokes.
But can someone explain Nixon's place behind the stumps? He is 36 years old, poor with the bat, and has only a few years left in him at best.
-Chimpdaddy-
Loye is an interesting prospect. He is a decent player with some unothordox strokes.
But can someone explain Nixon's place behind the stumps? He is 36 years old, poor with the bat, and has only a few years left in him at best.
-Chimpdaddy-
Think it was an attempt at a wild card to try and bring something new to the team. Am hoping they want Davies in the long term but didn't want to throw him into a world cup so brought in an older player. He does bring in enthusiasm but hasn't exactly been a revelation with the bat. He'll get the world cup before they move on to someone else IMO.
What'd be your lineup Kev? Just think we need Loye to try and get some runs in the powerplays or would someone else make way for Collingwood?
What'd be your lineup Kev? Just think we need Loye to try and get some runs in the powerplays or would someone else make way for Collingwood?
Man of Honour
Nixon was an odd one, i think everyone expects davies long term but they want to wait till he's really ready. The thinking behind nixon wasn't surprising, but i thought it led to prior by default....
I think collingwood will stay because even without any form with the bat, his overs are useful, without him they'd have to ask someone else to bowl a few and if you bring in loye instead then the person you ask has to be one out of vaughan (underated off breaks), pieterson (overated off breaks) or bell (untried medium pace)... Also, he's a superb fielder...
I think collingwood will stay because even without any form with the bat, his overs are useful, without him they'd have to ask someone else to bowl a few and if you bring in loye instead then the person you ask has to be one out of vaughan (underated off breaks), pieterson (overated off breaks) or bell (untried medium pace)... Also, he's a superb fielder...
Soldato
Can't understand how they can possibly leave out Loye. He was the first batsmen in the whole tour to actually start taking the game to Australia. Yet they decide to choose the same useless names who have done nothing since they got over there How strange.
Vaughan CLEAN BOWLED by Bond, not the best of starts.
How strange.Vaughan CLEAN BOWLED by Bond, not the best of starts.
Yeah the top three had a strike rate of 65, 0 and 42. I just think on the slower pitches we need to attack the power plays and Loye is the man to do it. Got up this morning and heard Strauss did well, even hitting a quick bowler for 6, had to check the stats on cricinfo before I'd believe that one. Collingwood did very well and at a decent strike rate too. Dalrymple did a very good job as the finisher again with 29 from 26.
New Zealand on course for victory at the moment.
New Zealand on course for victory at the moment.