England Ashes make up of the side 4/5 bowlers?

Lots of discussion on this recently.

I work on the basis that our top '6' will come from:

Cook
Strauss
Trott
KP
Collingwood
Bell

so, pretty much the 2009 side. I think at best any England fan would call that workmanlike rather than world beating and if you look where our success as a batting unit came from in 2009 it was actually from 6-9

Prior
Flintoff
Broad
Swann

If we go the 4 bowlers route we'll most probably go in with a 6-9 of:

Bell
Prior
Broad
Swann

Which would be decent. Can we rely on a 7-9 of

Swann
Broad
'Bresnan' ?

I guess this all ties in with the make up of the bowling attack. Now I favour a 5 man attack only if all of those 5 bowlers are good enough, if you look back to 2006/7 we made the error I thought we might by picking 5 bowlers only to find the 5th bowler was pretty much sparingly used.

I don't think any of our current pacemen are of sufficient quality to suggest that an extra bowler is going to make any difference whatsoever, so its more important we get the balance right with regards type of bowler.

Broad is a cert, Finn could prove very useful on Aussie decks and Swanny is also a cert as the spinner. My big worry on the last tests evidence is Jimmy Anderson. He offers up too much hittable dross when the ball isn't swinging.

For those who favour 5 bowlers - who would be your 5th bowler? I think they've got to be able to bat, in modern cricket a 9-11 of something like Anderson, Onions & Finn isn't a go-er.

Never take Bresnan to Aus. He's not nearly as talented or as workmanlike as the Hoggard's or Flintoff's that have gone before.

The flatter the pitch, the greater the need for five bowlers - so make that five for Adelaide. Assuming that Broad, Finn, Swann and Anderson are the core of the bowling attack, that leaves:

Siders
Shazad
Onions
Monty

.....to fight for the fifth place.

Incedentally, we could do with Monty bowling in tandem with Swann at OT in the current test.

I'd flat out take Carberry to Brisbane or Perth.


Wherever the fast pitches lie, I reckon he'll be in business. Plus he's a cracking fielder. Someone in the ring to keep Ponting or Clarke under pressure.

Collingwood and Carberry will definitely be ruthless.

Basil wrote:The flatter the pitch, the greater the need for five bowlers - so make that five for Adelaide. Assuming that Broad, Finn, Swann and Anderson are the core of the bowling attack, that leaves:

Siders
Shazad
Onions
Monty

.....to fight for the fifth place.

3 out of 4 of those leave us with the 3 tailenders scenario. Woe!

Needs Timmy B to step up to the plate. He bowled pap at Lords but he's been better than that in his other performances.

Oh noooooooooo ... not this again.

Prerequisites, whether it's "4 bowlers" or "5 bowlers":

1. they have to be FIT

2. at least three have to bowl WELL (hopefully more than three)

3. all except maximum one of them have to know how to use a bat (hopefully all of them)

4. the pitch and conditions have to be taken into consideration at all times.

Those conditions met as far as possible, you will know that I always tended to gainsay Gordon's (to my mind dogmatic) insistence on four bowlers as the (inflexible) rule.

Bat-friendly, bowling-unhelpful conditions would always suggest five bowlers to me.

Bowl-friendly, batting-unhelful conditions would always suggest four bowlers.

The great divide should not really arise, as there should always be at least one "bowler" who is as good as an "all-rounder" in any Test team.


So much for the general guidelines. Actual team make-up? ....

Strauss
Cook (if he can pull himself together, otherwise ??)
Trott or Bell
Kev
Collingwood (needs to practise his bowling if joint 5th bowler!)
Prior (Kieswetter as back-up possibility)
fifth bowler with a bat, perhaps Bresnan (at 7) or bat, probably Morgan (at 6)
Broad
Swann
preferably Onions, perhaps Anderson or maybe even Shazhad??, or else a second spinner at Sydney (Monty?? Tredwell??? I'd like the positive and varied option of Rashid, but too late?)
probably Finn

something like that

Imagine Bres at Adelaide - now tell me you haven't broken out in a cold sweat.

How did I forget Sid?

Alzheimers perhaps. Reading too many of Horrie's posts.

He could play at 10. But will he truly be FIT?? (see Prerequisite 1 )

DJ_Smerk wrote:I'd flat out take Carberry to Brisbane or Perth.


Wherever the fast pitches lie, I reckon he'll be in business. Plus he's a cracking fielder. Someone in the ring to keep Ponting or Clarke under pressure.

Collingwood and Carberry will definitely be ruthless.

All he needs to add to that lot is a few runs .now and then ...

Basil wrote:Imagine Bres at Adelaide - now tell me you haven't broken out in a cold sweat.

Might be fine as a strain-every-sinew medium-pace fifth bowler. Variation if the rest of the attack pack is worthy of the name.

I'm not convinced at all about this 'need 5 bowlers in Aus' malarkey.

Lets look at our last test wins in Aus

2002-3 Sydney
http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/64013.html

4 man attack of Hoggard, Caddick, Harmison & Dawson (lol)

1998-9 Melbourne
http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63817.html

4 man attack of Gough, Headley, Mullally & Fraser

1995 Adelaide
http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63666.html

5 man attack of Malcolm, Fraser, Defreitas, Lewis & Tufnell


So 2 of the last 3 test wins down under have been with 4 bowlers. And the 5 bowlers win was Adelaide so you may be right Bas

Not forgetting of course with a 5 man attack we lost all 5 tests in 2006/7 and finished the test series with innings scores of 159, 161, 291 & 147

Basil wrote:Imagine Bres at Adelaide - now tell me you haven't broken out in a cold sweat.

If he's opening the bowling like at Lords - definitely. But as a 4th seamer, there are possibilities....

5 bowlers could be a good option if those 5 bowlers are something like-

Bresnan/Rashid/Anderson- obviously not at 7 though (depending on conditions)
Swann
Broad
Tremlett
Finn

They need to think more about their spin options. The fifth bowler often has to bowl with an old ball when the pitch is flat so unless they are a reverse swing seamer in the mould of Simon Jones or Craig White they will struggle. If they can find a decent spinner who can bat at 7 they would be sorted.

Oh, and one more thing to add.





Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid Adil Rashid

Adil Rashid I think I hear you say - still a way short of class for this level surely?

Though I agree with your premise about the need for the 5th bowler to do something other than be an up and down merchant when the ball is old.

Basil wrote:Incedentally, we could do with Monty bowling in tandem with Swann at OT in the current test.

Where does he stand in the current pecking order for England Test spinners? Second, third, fourth, lower? I guess it's all going to depend on what kind of season he has at Sussex (the stats suggest reasonable, so far) but if he's in some sort of form you have to suspect he will be taken ahead of untried alternatives as backup to Swann.

The England spin pecking order would presumably be something along the lines of:

Swann
Tredmill
Monty
Rashid
Fatwell?
Gazza B?

Interestingly despite 4 bowlers always feeling a little weak, it is much more potent than 5 bowlers for England. Over the last 5 years England have played with both strategies:

4 bowlers: P29, W13, D12, L4
5 bowlers: P34, W10, D10, L14

What this says about the Flintoff effect I don't know. Looking at that maybe they should go with 3 bowlers?

It says that Flintoff generally missed the series against crappier opposition and managed to make himself available for the big series.

Gary 111 wrote:The England spin pecking order would presumably be something along the lines of:

Swann
Tredmill
Monty
Rashid
Fatwell?
Gazza B?

If we have to go beyond Rashid, we might as well give up picking spinners.

I still say pick your best bowlers of whatever variety they are. Monty can't be in our top 5 or 6 by a long shot.

I think Monty's time has passed. Was fun for awhile but unfortunately he is a very, very stupid man.

Well one dimensional anyway.

JKLever wrote:Well one dimensional anyway.

I might have been a tad harsh, but he certainly does not have a cricketing brain and seems totally unable to adapt his game.

And he runs like a girlie. Burn him.