Ashes 2010/11

[VillaZogmariner]

Cameron White has just hit a century for A.

Talking to a few Crims fans out here and they are all worried about how well our preparations have been compared to theirs. Some of them are even suggesting that they should drop some of the older, more out of touch players (including Ponting they say) and start building towards the future. Basically writing off this Ashes and getting a side together to win it back on our patch in 2013.

[KevinGage]

I was hearing similar tales of woe when lived out there between 2004-06.

The series in 2006 was all set up for England apparently, a fast track with bounce at Brisbane  (tailor made for Harmison and Flintoff) an ageing Australian side versus an up and coming England side and only one side (England) who apparently had the bowlers to take 20 wickets.

We all know how that one turned out.

They'll be ready and firing, don't worry.

Hometown conditions, the Kookaburra ball and a good (though not great side) with a very impressive home record.

I look at that bowling attack and of the designated bowlers Johnson, Hilfenhaus and a fired up Bollinger would be enough to deal with. Throw into the equation Shane Watson who was considered an allrounder a few years ago and is capable of bowling long spells and they're well stocked in that dept. Haven't seen too much of Doherty but he's a left armer and KP has been having 'mares with even bog standard spinners for a while now.

The Aussies looked good for long periods against India in India, pushed them all the way and with a bit of nous would have got over the line. They're still a very good side. England have improved a lot and consistency of selection means this is probably the most settled side to tour Australia for a while. They are still capable of some very average cricket though, you always get the feeling that some horror spell or session is just around the corner. As per Headingley 2009 and the West Indies a few months previous. They also struggled at times against Pakistan last summer.

Reason tells you that you shouldn't look to far into the future and try to call it, there are so many variables in cricket be they conditions on the day, injuries, form and whatnot.

So I'm going to run at complete odds with that and say a lot depends on the first test, in fact I think the whole series pretty much hangs on it.  If Australia win -and win well- the momentum and support they'll get behind them will banish any concerns that the current lot aren't up to it. If England win -or even draw- it suddenly gives credence to all these doubts about the Aussie set up. The toss will be so crucial in that regard. If England can win it and post a total in excess of 400 (ideally closer to 500) the Aussies will know they are in the game and will do well to match that.

Thing is they probably can. If the roles are reversed and Australia are first up, I'm not sure England could match that kind of total. Scoreboard pressure and all that.

Also, even if everything was to go absolutely to plan for England and they won the first test I'd still back Australia to have enough in the tank to pull it back and win over the next four. If England lose first up, I don't see them pulling it back in the remaining tests -maybe winning a consolation one in Melbourne or Sydney.

Even drawing in Brisbane would be a big positive, as it would give this England side the certainty that things are already different on this tour and there won't be any whitewash. For the Aussies, a suspicious and increasingly critical media would put the boot in further.  Again the key to that is to get a big total first up and I can only see that happening if England bat first.

So Australia can probably afford a defeat first up (hard as that will be to take for them). England really can't. And even if they were to win, whilst that might increase their chances I still back the Aussies to claw it back in the latter tests.

I called it as 3-1 Australia a while back and haven't seen too much reason to veer from that. Providing it's a hard fought series and hopefully goes beyond the third game that alone will be a vast improvement on 2006.

[OzVilla]

I just don't think the toss will be as crucial as in previous years, infact it might even be a good one to lose.

Plenty of rain up here of late, forecast for another week of Sunshine and showers, it'll be around 27c with a bit of cloud cover.  It'll swing alright and with all this moisture you'd expect to see some movement off the deck.

If Ponting wins the toss he'll bat, no doubt.  If Strauss wins the toss it's not so clear cut what he'll do.  He might fancy sticking them in if those are the conditions and back the boys to do a job on them and really send them a message.  Their top order is under alot of pressure.

[lovejoy]

Australia for the series is above evens. Like finding money in the street.

[Bald Eagle]

I honestly think England will win this series. The Ausies are so out of form that they are there for the taking. England are improving match by match. We have a settled squad, while they seem to be panicking in who to pick in their squad. Nailed on 3-1 to us Poms. Fuck em. This is due and we are good enough.

[bertlambshank]

2-2 and we come back with Ernie Wise.

[Bald Eagle]

2-2 and we come back with Ernie Wise.

I would take that, but i still think we will win.

[KevinGage]

Where do we stand on Tremlett?

I'd say there are a few question marks over the effectiveness of the likes of Anderson and possibly Broad in Aussie conditions. A bowler like Finn should do well but he's still quite raw too.

I'm pretty certain they'll go with the four bowlers they sent up to Brisbane in advance, there was little point in the whole exercise otherwise.

But I'd be tempted to go with Tremlett.

OK he might only have done the business versus Australia A  but the accuracy and rhythm seemed to be there and that's crucial against any opposition. 

[PaulWinch again]

I think it depends what happens in the first Test, but I think Tremlett is a good option.

[KevinGage]

If there is one track that should be ideal for a bowler like Tremlett it will be Brisbane though.

Or Brisbane and WA.

I like Finn, but has he done enough to be a guaranteed starter?
The concern would be that if Jimmy can't swing it and Broad has one of his ineffective periods you're suddenly relying on a young, inexperienced bowler who still has issues with his technique to produce the goods.

If for whatever reason Tremlett plays and doesn't get wickets he seems to have enough control to not let the opposition build up too much momentum.

I'd have concerns about Broad too, but he does seem to have the priceless ability to nail the oppositions top batsmen or pick up a wicket at a key time so if anyone was to make way it would be Finn.

[Bald Eagle]

If there is one track that should be ideal for a bowler like Tremlett it will be Brisbane though.

Or Brisbane and WA.

I like Finn, but has he done enough to be a guaranteed starter?
The concern would be that if Jimmy can't swing it and Broad has one of his ineffective periods you're suddenly relying on a young, inexperienced bowler who still has issues with his technique to produce the goods.

If for whatever reason Tremlett plays and doesn't get wickets he seems to have enough control to not let the opposition build up too much momentum.

I'd have concerns about Broad too, but he does seem to have the priceless ability to nail the oppositions top batsmen or pick up a wicket at a key time so if anyone was to make way it would be Finn.

Dont worry about Broad. He might get caned now and again but the fucker has a lovely habit of bowling good batsmen out.The weather forecast is cloudy so that puts Anderson in the picture. Tremlett and Bressnan will enter the equation when we have injuries or lack of form. Miles better back up bowlers than the convicts. Its all gravy mam.

[taylorsworkrate]

Australia for the series is above evens. Like finding money in the street.

Not really, considering we are the better team.  Australia have a slight advantage in conditions, but all of our batsmen and bowlers have shown good form.  Our pace attack has even got the ball to swing, something we were told wouldn't happen with the kookaburra.  Swann is by a mile the best spin bowler in the world.  We have a very impressive air of confidence about us and for the first ashes tour in living memory, we don't have countless injuries to key players.

On the other hand Australia's batsmen look badly out of touch, they've lost their last 3 test matches and something like 7 out of 8 in all forms of the game.  Whilst Ponting is one of the finest batsmen of all time he is a poor captain at best.  They picked 17 players in the original squad, showing they are confused and concerned.  They have a debutant spinner who takes his first class wickets at an average of 48.   Their media has panned them and the pressure on Australia is HUGE.

It's only my ridiculous English pessimism that says we won't win it tidily.

[taylorsworkrate]

I was hearing similar tales of woe when lived out there between 2004-06.

The series in 2006 was all set up for England apparently, a fast track with bounce at Brisbane  (tailor made for Harmison and Flintoff) an ageing Australian side versus an up and coming England side and only one side (England) who apparently had the bowlers to take 20 wickets.

We all know how that one turned out.

They'll be ready and firing, don't worry.

Hometown conditions, the Kookaburra ball and a good (though not great side) with a very impressive home record.

I look at that bowling attack and of the designated bowlers Johnson, Hilfenhaus and a fired up Bollinger would be enough to deal with. Throw into the equation Shane Watson who was considered an allrounder a few years ago and is capable of bowling long spells and they're well stocked in that dept. Haven't seen too much of Doherty but he's a left armer and KP has been having 'mares with even bog standard spinners for a while now.

The Aussies looked good for long periods against India in India, pushed them all the way and with a bit of nous would have got over the line. They're still a very good side. England have improved a lot and consistency of selection means this is probably the most settled side to tour Australia for a while. They are still capable of some very average cricket though, you always get the feeling that some horror spell or session is just around the corner. As per Headingley 2009 and the West Indies a few months previous. They also struggled at times against Pakistan last summer.

Reason tells you that you shouldn't look to far into the future and try to call it, there are so many variables in cricket be they conditions on the day, injuries, form and whatnot.

So I'm going to run at complete odds with that and say a lot depends on the first test, in fact I think the whole series pretty much hangs on it.  If Australia win -and win well- the momentum and support they'll get behind them will banish any concerns that the current lot aren't up to it. If England win -or even draw- it suddenly gives credence to all these doubts about the Aussie set up. The toss will be so crucial in that regard. If England can win it and post a total in excess of 400 (ideally closer to 500) the Aussies will know they are in the game and will do well to match that.

Thing is they probably can. If the roles are reversed and Australia are first up, I'm not sure England could match that kind of total. Scoreboard pressure and all that.

Also, even if everything was to go absolutely to plan for England and they won the first test I'd still back Australia to have enough in the tank to pull it back and win over the next four. If England lose first up, I don't see them pulling it back in the remaining tests -maybe winning a consolation one in Melbourne or Sydney.

Even drawing in Brisbane would be a big positive, as it would give this England side the certainty that things are already different on this tour and there won't be any whitewash. For the Aussies, a suspicious and increasingly critical media would put the boot in further.  Again the key to that is to get a big total first up and I can only see that happening if England bat first.

So Australia can probably afford a defeat first up (hard as that will be to take for them). England really can't. And even if they were to win, whilst that might increase their chances I still back the Aussies to claw it back in the latter tests.

I called it as 3-1 Australia a while back and haven't seen too much reason to veer from that. Providing it's a hard fought series and hopefully goes beyond the third game that alone will be a vast improvement on 2006.

I think they are currently a decent side at best.  They did lose two nil to an Indian side who has since drawn two tests against a very poor New Zealand. 

Australia's batting is strong if it clicks.  Ponting is always a worry.  Not sure about Watson and Clarke really struggles against good short stuff.  North is okay but can be got at (Swann could make mincemeat of him).  Hussey is either awful or brilliant.  Haddin is coming back from an injury.

Australia quite simply do not have a test quality spinner.  Doherty takes his first class wickets at 48 and has only been picked because of KP's recent struggles against that type of bowler.   He is definitely due some big runs though and i'd be suprised if KP doesn't have a great series. 

Mitchell Johnson has really gone off the boil since his wonder year in 08.  He is undoubtably very talented, but has shown little reason of late to suggest he can get back to his best.

Bollinger and Hilfenhaus are good solid bowlers but not spectacular.

Pontings captaincy leaves a lot to be desired for me.  Had a good record whilst the likes of Warne, Mcgrath, Gilchrist, Hayden and Langer were around but then so would any captain.  (He also lost an ashes series with those players).

[taylorsworkrate]

Australia just added Khawaja to squad as cover for injury doubt Michael Clarke.  Khawaja didn't look too good against Englands back up bowlers.

[Yeltzer]

Of course we'll win - Freddie Flintoff says so!