Ashes squad

Sweeper said:
That's a long tail mind. I know you don't pick a side to collapse, but surely with England you have to pick a side with one eye on a collapse in the middle order. I would prefer a proper, capable batsman at 8.
Click to expand...

it is

but its partly why they like Robinson, although he’s not shown it.

wood won’t play 5 tests

the day night is ideal to rest him so he needs to play here. Once they know what the crack with Perth is then they can see if he can play 2 or 3
Sweeper said:
Fair point. If there's no pace in the pitches then Robinson obviously plays ahead of Wood.


Woakes has to play for me (even if not at the expense of Robinson). Fantastic all round cricketer - and we need extra runs down the order with our penchant for a collapse.
Click to expand...

I don’t know how you can see he has to play

his record abroad is appalling

now I think he’s a better cricketer now but not better than those other bowlers
NorthCountryBoy said:
It has been but he’s in a phase of his career where he’s much improved. His record in South Africa in 2020 is much more relevant than what he did in India in 2016.
Click to expand...

yesh but his record still isn’t good, Mark wood was amazing in South Africa

and Robinson is a far better bowler than Woakes for these conditions

it’s a big big mistake by England if they go with medium height medium pace right quicks

they’ll get beat.

Jimmy or Woakes

broad or Robinson

they are the match ups
 
Last edited:


Jack Torrance said:
Robinson is fine to bat at 8. Pick the bowling attack you think will take 20 wickets.
Woakes probably plays later in the series but for the first 2 or 3 tests I think they need to gamble with that attack assuming they remain fit and look potent enough
Click to expand...
Do you really think that bowling attack is capable of 20 wickets over there though? I don’t - nor do I think we have many other options that are, which worries me greatly about this series
 
TravellingMackem said:
Do you really think that bowling attack is capable of 20 wickets over there though? I don’t - nor do I think we have many other options that are, which worries me greatly about this series
Click to expand...

stokes, wood, Robinson, leach, Jimmy

with broad n Woakes in wings, can take 20 wickets in my opinion

I think that’s a good attack

you can’t underestimate how big stokes is

he’d get in our team just as a bowler in Oz, he’s aggressive, gets reverse swing, but can also bowl long spells

how they use him will depend on wood’s fitness

it’s so much better than our attack 4 years ago

can we get runs? I wonder if this will change if they play hameed or Crawley, or bairstow or Pope

I can’t wait now, gonna try get my night shifts on them.
Liverpool Beachball said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1452666272462876685
Click to expand...
Liverpool Beachball said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1452666272462876685
Click to expand...

great to hear he’s back in a good place. Not easy life at times.
 
Last edited:
The Rat said:
stokes, wood, Robinson, leach, Jimmy

with broad n Woakes in wings, can take 20 wickets in my opinion

I think that’s a good attack

you can’t underestimate how big stokes is

he’d get in our team just as a bowler in Oz, he’s aggressive, gets reverse swing, but can also bowl long spells

how they use him will depend on wood’s fitness

it’s so much better than our attack 4 years ago

can we get runs? I wonder if this will change if they play hameed or Crawley, or bairstow or Pope

I can’t wait now, gonna try get my night shifts on them.



great to hear he’s back in a good place. Not easy life at times.
Click to expand...
A lot depends on what Ben Stokes we get. Prime stokes, sure, but if he’s half baked or injured …
 
TravellingMackem said:
A lot depends on what Ben Stokes we get. Prime stokes, sure, but if he’s half baked or injured …
Click to expand...

is the missing part of that sentence “….he’d still be much better than Dan Lawrence or Zak Crawley”?
The Rat said:
can we get runs?
Click to expand...

To be fair - the whole question of England competing in the series can probably be boiled down to this. I think that our bowlers will create opportunities to get results, over the course of the series. As long as the batsmen do their part. If the batsmen as a unit stay true to recent form, it won’t matter what the bowlers do.
 
Last edited:
Sweeper said:
is the missing part of that sentence “….he’d still be much better than Dan Lawrence or Zak Crawley”?


To be fair - the whole question of England competing in the series can probably be boiled down to this. I think that our bowlers will create opportunities to get results, over the course of the series. As long as the batsmen do their part. If the batsmen as a unit stay true to recent form, it won’t matter what the bowlers do.
Click to expand...
There’s a large gap between being better than Dan Lawrence and being good enough to beat the Aussies
 
Sweeper said:
is the missing part of that sentence “….he’d still be much better than Dan Lawrence or Zak Crawley”?


To be fair - the whole question of England competing in the series can probably be boiled down to this. I think that our bowlers will create opportunities to get results, over the course of the series. As long as the batsmen do their part. If the batsmen as a unit stay true to recent form, it won’t matter what the bowlers do.
Click to expand...

Yeah you are right like

I would say is I dont think we need as many runs as the pundits say, like 500+, the India win in Australia showed that, 350-400 type ones werent they

I guess it depends on the pitches to a degree, as they had a bit more in them.

I just think the whole team, including the batters will be lifted now. They will have more belief that if they can get a score, they can take 20 wickets

Selection is key now for me. Hameed is the one I wouldnt play in Oz. I think he has potential for England, just not convinced he will make runs in Oz at the minute.
TravellingMackem said:
There’s a large gap between being better than Dan Lawrence and being good enough to beat the Aussies
Click to expand...

I think even a 75% Ben Stokes is brilliant, and would walk in the Aussies side.

His batting wont be a problem like, its how much he can bowl.
 
TravellingMackem said:
Do you really think that bowling attack is capable of 20 wickets over there though? I don’t - nor do I think we have many other options that are, which worries me greatly about this series
Click to expand...
Their batting line up has as many holes as ours. Whomever they pick from Burns, Wade, Green or Head to play alongside Labuschange and the two crying cheating bastards, we shouldn't be too worried. It's just two of them three are top class and the other one can score runs at home.

Only takes 30 balls to get them.........

Their bowling, however, is miles ahead of ours on paper.
 
Steak Pie said:
Their batting line up has as many holes as ours. Whomever they pick from Burns, Wade, Green or Head to play alongside Labuschange and the two crying cheating bastards, we shouldn't be too worried. It's just two of them three are top class and the other one can score runs at home.

Only takes 30 balls to get them.........

Their bowling, however, is miles ahead of ours on paper.
Click to expand...
I still wonder about Labuschagne. His first class record is good without being spectacular. And he’s only 18 tests in
 
Really would have liked Crawley to be going out there in form.

I think he could be a real success down there. Doesn’t seem an accepted view on here anymore but I think he’s got everything you need at Test level. He’s got the ability imo just needs games and experience and exposure to top quality bowling to learn how to play and build an innings. Things that come with time & maturity I suppose.

No doubt imo he could be a success in Australia, the white ball form in the Pakistan series was a bit of a surprise, but while he was slightly unlucky with injury, his Test form meant he had to be dropped I guess. Would like to see him get another chance.
 
Salem Street South said:
Really would have liked Crawley to be going out there in form.

I think he could be a real success down there. Doesn’t seem an accepted view on here anymore but I think he’s got everything you need at Test level. He’s got the ability imo just needs games and experience and exposure to top quality bowling to learn how to play and build an innings. Things that come with time & maturity I suppose.

No doubt imo he could be a success in Australia, the white ball form in the Pakistan series was a bit of a surprise, but while he was slightly unlucky with injury, his Test form meant he had to be dropped I guess. Would like to see him get another chance.
Click to expand...
Technically I agree, but I’m not sure he’s got the mental side of the game. Looks very flustered at times
 

Back
Top