Australia v England, 2nd Test, Adelaide, 5-9 December, 2013

Compton to return to keep the saffie quota up and to give Mudge a romantic interest in the tour

Henry wrote:

skully wrote:From a hard-nosed Aus supporter perspective, the best outcome for us at this point would be for Belf to be elevated to 3 then have to march to the wicket early in most innings because Carbs can't come to grips with the Aussie bounce and Chef continues to be the shadow of his 2010-12 self. That way Aus would maximise their chances against England's best (technically) batsman.

Most number threes prefer coming to the wicket early, rather than at 150-1.

True enough, but my point was about getting at Bell when the ball and wicket still has a bit in it, rather than what he generally faces at no. 5. I think Aus would prefer to bowl at Bell at 3 than at 5.

Why haven't other sides thought of that before?? Let the opposition openers put on 150 because the number 3 won't like it. That is pure genius.

Merlin wrote:

Basil wrote:It's more likely that Root will move up the order to three with Bairstow coming in at six, in an ideal world, we would pick Stokes but I'm not convinced that he's a number seven yet - never mind a number six.

Precisely my thinking.
Root is an opener.
Dinga has settled well (and scored runs) at 5.

Stokes ain't ready yet - so Trev (with all due respect) - removing your selection (and that of Petey's) of Stokes and re-inserting a recognised batsman - like say Ballance - reverts back to my original thought process.

Only 4 bowlers . . . Jimmy, Broadly, Swanny and Bressie.

4 bowlers on the road. Good timing!

skully wrote:So do English supporters believe Carbs will perform? Or will the opening partnership become Cook and Root?

I don't think that there's much doubt that Cook and Root are destined for a long stint as opening partners - possibly re-starting before the end of this series. Good luck to Carberry and I hope that he wrings every possible run out of this opportunity; but I think his selection is a symptom of a worrying indecision shown by our management. First it was the schmozzle over Compton, then the farcical selection of Woakes and Kerrigan and now Root has been shunted down the order - probably to be elevated again to number three. Someone's hand is coming off the tiller and it does not bode well.

Henry wrote:

skully wrote:From a hard-nosed Aus supporter perspective, the best outcome for us at this point would be for Belf to be elevated to 3 then have to march to the wicket early in most innings because Carbs can't come to grips with the Aussie bounce and Chef continues to be the shadow of his 2010-12 self. That way Aus would maximise their chances against England's best (technically) batsman.

Most number threes prefer coming to the wicket early, rather than at 150-1.

WTF?

G.Wood wrote:Why haven't other sides thought of that before??  Let the opposition openers put on 150 because the number 3 won't like it.  That is pure genius.

That is the most logical explanation yet for how Ishant Sharma winkled out 50 tests.

[quoteOnly 4 bowlers . . . Jimmy, Broadly, Swanny and Bressie.][/quote]
So we should replace one 79mph trundler with another? We need a wicket taking option as the third seamer, which means Rankin or Finn. We also need a 5th bowler in case that wicket taking option goes around the park/runs out of steam after 10 overs.

Henry wrote:Only 4 bowlers . . . Jimmy, Broadly, Swanny and Bressie.

So we should replace one 79mph trundler with another? We need a wicket taking option as the third seamer, which means Rankin or Finn. We also need a 5th bowler in case that wicket taking option goes around the park/runs out of steam after 10 overs.

So why plumb for Stokes as the 4th seamer (5th bowler)?
He's untried and sticking him into what will now be a cauldron at Adelaide for his first test would be madness.
And why pick Rankin / Finn to drop 'em in at 90 mph ish on a flat and unhelpful wicket?
I don't see your logic somehow . . .
I'd go with Bressie (if fit) and hope it swings like a bull's bollocks down in Adelaide. . . Bres can also bat a wee bit.

Bresnan's playing for the Performance squad against somone's second XI starting tomorrow. Queensland, is it?

David Willey's gone home with a back injury.

Let's also hope Ballance gets a game sometime between now and the 2nd test. . . and hopefully gets some runs under his belt.   I'd still go with him at 6

Cook
Carbs
Root
KP
Dinga
Ballance
Ginga
Bressie
Broadly
Swann
Jimmy

But I'd guess they'll stick with Prior and ship in one of the giants in place of Bressie
Still only 4 bowlers  . . . that's the worry.

Do the selectors have the balls to give Stokes a game in place of Balance  . . .?
Tough call as they need to roll Aus over twice and as such, the bowling needs beefing up

We could always call up Tymal Mills. Fire with fire etc....

Henry wrote:We could always call up Tymal Mills. Fire with fire etc....

I didnt realise Shaun Tait was playing

One more time: we need batting options. The bowling options can look after themselves: anyone but Tremlett.

Swann needs to recognise his godawful performance as well - laurels have been rested 'pon.

CARN Brezzy lad.

embee wrote:

Henry wrote:We could always call up Tymal Mills. Fire with fire etc....

I didnt realise Shaun Tait was playing

If only he was that 'good'.

Bresnan always becomes such a good player when he's not in the England team. Since the 2010-11 Ashes he's averaging 45 with the ball FFS.

Brass Monkey wrote:One more time: we need batting options. The bowling options can look after themselves: anyone but Tremlett.

Swann needs to recognise his godawful performance as well - laurels have been rested 'pon.

Although the margin in Test 1 was a little on the high side, the difference between the sides was only a waggy tail and a big partnership.  4 of the the Aussie top 6 still look incapable of scoring meaninful runs - and one of the players not in that 4 is Warner ffs.  

You still have to think that Jimmy, Broad and Swann are going to run through us for not many several times in this series.

Possibly never cheap enough though. Especially with some of the (giving up) 'bowling dry' fields. Which took a murdering last game.

G.Wood wrote:

Brass Monkey wrote:One more time: we need batting options. The bowling options can look after themselves: anyone but Tremlett.

Swann needs to recognise his godawful performance as well - laurels have been rested 'pon.

Although the margin in Test 1 was a little on the high side, the difference between the sides was only a waggy tail and a big partnership.  4 of the the Aussie top 6 still look incapable of scoring meaninful runs - and one of the players not in that 4 is Warner ffs.  

You still have to think that Jimmy, Broad and Swann are going to run through us for not many several times in this series.

100% agree with this.

The good start to the series was vital to Aus for exactly this reason. You just know they are 1 wicket away from a house of cards collapse at any time. We need Pup having a Belf-like series, and each of the rest of the top 7 contributing at least big knock in the series with him. Warner may have already given his.

To win the series Aus has to maintain any sort of mental edge they can on England. Hence Boof's "phurt" at suggestions he should sit down with Flower to discuss sledging.

So how is Brezzy? I haven't read anything about his progress on return from injury.

skully wrote:So how is Brezzy? I haven't read anything about his progress on return from injury.

Playing his first game since the back injury today for the England Performance squad (basically the A team) against Queensland second XI.

Cricinfo mentioned that the bowling coach, David Saker, hadn't bothered to stay behind and watch him in action, which rather suggests he's not in the frame to return any time soon.

Which wouldn't be a surprise as he's had the same injury as James Pattinson (stress fracture of the back), picked up at about the same time last summer, and that's ruled him out for the entire series. I know there are degrees of injury and some people heal up faster than others, but it still seems a bit early for Timbo to be bowling again at anything like full tilt.

Cheers for the update, D.

but it still seems a bit early for Timbo to be bowling again at anything like full tilt.

Hasn't happened for two years.

Full fitness, then. You know what I mean.