England v Australia, 3rd Test, Edgbaston, Jul 30 - Aug 3

Batman wrote:England's real problem next test will be complacency. They better not get to footloose and free...

Strausser won't let that happen - nor will Flower.
Cardiff was a serious wake-up, arse-kicking call, and their response at Lord's proved it.

England's main problem will be not playing like twats, more like.
We've had so many hammerings from the Aussies I don't think complacency will come into it.

Jontyh wrote:
We've had so many hammerings from the Aussies I don't think complacency will come into it.

Exactly, you can't be complacent playing the number one side. Now batting like millionaires again you wouldn't rule out...

Fred will have to repeat his heroics of 4 years ago.

Because I can't see Bell as being anything much but 1-0 to the Aussies.

PeterCS wrote:Fred will have to repeat his heroics of 4 years ago.

Because I can't see Bell as being anything much but 1-0 to the Aussies.

But lets face it, with a crippled KP our batting this series is going to come down to a collective effort by a long batting order with or without him.

Very true, For all his swatting, some of it exquisite (but in total only about 4/5 shots), Kev has not been his usual upbeat marauding self.

It's just that I feel at this stage, Bell is a natural, unassisted passenger (especially morale-wise), rather than one incapacitated through injury.

Bell will smash Australia all over the park for at least 150. Guaranteed. Hic.

One short word makes sense of all that went before.

To be fair to Bell he score 4 fifties down under, but we all know he's good for a pretty 30 before chipping to mid-off.

And his record of never scoring runs under pressure can't be denied.

Is it possible to put Collingswood's head on to Bell's shoulders? He'd be an wesome batsman then. Colly might not be so good though, with Bell's head allied to his talent....

Also, it might fall off.

Damn. I thought it was foolproof.

Strauss
Cook
Bell
Collingwood
Bopara
Prior +
Flintoff
Swann
Sidebottom
Anderson
Harmison

So thinks Boycott.

Dello wrote:Strauss
Cook
Bell
Collingwood
Bopara
Prior +
Flintoff
Swann
Sidebottom
Anderson
Harmison

So thinks Boycott.

3 changes from a winning side? I think we've been down that kind of route before. Players who aren't in the side are always absolutely fabulous funnily enough.

One of them is enforced.

The other two are a practical alternative to an obvious weakness - Broad and Onions barely contributed at Lord's. And with back-to-back Tests coming up, England's can't drop all of the workload on Flintoff, Anderson and Swann's shoulders.

Onions has hurt his elbow anyway, and might not be fit selection.

I don't see Harmison as solving anything, because he'll do what he always has in the past - bowl rubbish. This view that because he's taken a few wickets in the county matches he'll suddenly be wonderful again is a triumph of hope over experience. I thought we'd got over all that with the endless flops of Ramprakash.

Broad we'll just have to agree to differ on, because it's pointless re-hashing all that.

With a bit of luck, Fred and Harmi will bombard Bell with bouncers in training, leading to a broken finger.

Of course, Harmison does have the propensity to bowl rubbish when you're banking on him to tear in to them.

But he does occasionally bowl a grade or two higher than rubbish, which makes him a reasonable alternative to Broad who is blatantly out of his depth in this company.

England need someone for Flintoff to share his workload with in the fast and hostile stakes otherwise he won't make it to the fourth Test.

There's no-one in the team that played at Lord's that can fill that roll.

Dello wrote:Strauss
Cook
Bell
Collingwood
Bopara
Prior +
Flintoff
Swann
Sidebottom
Anderson
Harmison

So thinks Boycott.

I quite like the look of that. The replacements are all experienced, but with something to prove; Bopara at 5 is good thinking and we bat down to 10. Even PHS can biff it a bit, and we have good variety in the bowling. Wouldn't be unhappy with that.

Dello wrote:Of course, Harmison does have the propensity to bowl rubbish when you're banking on him to tear in to them.

But he does occasionally bowl a grade or two higher than rubbish, which makes him a reasonable alternative to Broad who is blatantly out of his depth in this company.

England need someone for Flintoff to share his workload with in the fast and hostile stakes otherwise he won't make it to the fourth Test.

There's no-one in the team that played at Lord's that can fill that roll.

Maybe, but Graham Onions has made decent sandwiches for years,

Bell should play down the order. The fact is, he averages 50 at five and six, and 33 at three.

Dello wrote:Of course, Harmison does have the propensity to bowl rubbish when you're banking on him to tear in to them.

But he does occasionally bowl a grade or two higher than rubbish, which makes him a reasonable alternative to Broad who is blatantly out of his depth in this company.

England need someone for Flintoff to share his workload with in the fast and hostile stakes otherwise he won't make it to the fourth Test.

There's no-one in the team that played at Lord's that can fill that roll.

When was the last time Harmison bowled anything other than complete dross?

Shoeshine wrote:

Dello wrote:Of course, Harmison does have the propensity to bowl rubbish when you're banking on him to tear in to them.

But he does occasionally bowl a grade or two higher than rubbish, which makes him a reasonable alternative to Broad who is blatantly out of his depth in this company.

England need someone for Flintoff to share his workload with in the fast and hostile stakes otherwise he won't make it to the fourth Test.

There's no-one in the team that played at Lord's that can fill that roll.

When was the last time Harmison bowled anything other than complete dross?

Dunno. going to tell us?

taipan wrote:

Shoeshine wrote:

Dello wrote:Of course, Harmison does have the propensity to bowl rubbish when you're banking on him to tear in to them.

But he does occasionally bowl a grade or two higher than rubbish, which makes him a reasonable alternative to Broad who is blatantly out of his depth in this company.

England need someone for Flintoff to share his workload with in the fast and hostile stakes otherwise he won't make it to the fourth Test.

There's no-one in the team that played at Lord's that can fill that roll.

When was the last time Harmison bowled anything other than complete dross?

Dunno. going to tell us?

Nope. Can't remember to be honest. He's been utter shite for years.

Oval 2003 would be one time, eh Taipan....