Skip to main content

First thoughts on the Ashes

The only minor surprise for me in the 2013 Australian Ashes squad announced last week was the selection of James Faulkner ahead of Moises Henriques as the second all-rounder. Minor because given  the Shane Watson shenanigans of recent times, I would have thought that Inverarity and co would have opted for a second batting all-rounder (which is what Henriques clearly is). Instead they've gone with a bowling all-rounder in Faulkner and it'll be interesting to see what happens if Watson's batting woes in Test match cricket continue in the first two Tests. As for the rest of the squad, given the way the inexperienced batting performed in India, Rogers and Haddin were always going to make it in to the team and the choice of Khawaja over Smith appears sound too given that the latter's strength is in playing spin bowling. The batting still looks as unsettled and shaky as the Indian fast bowling line-up and its here that the series will be won or lost for the Aussies. The return of Harris at the expense of Mitchell Johnson was always on the cards as soon as the former regained fitness. All in all, I'd have to agree with (what seems to be) the unanimous view that this is the best the Aussie selectors could have done. Not sure about the "worst squad since 1985" comments given I didn't see that team in action.

I don't however agree with Matt Cleary's first XI. I think Australia are at their best when they play with a solid opening pair capable of long partnerships, depth in batting, and strong pace bowling. While the last can be achieved with more or less any of the fast men in the squad, the first two are easier said than done given that they have five opening batsmen in the squad! My line-up for Trent Bridge would be (in batting order): Rogers, Cowan, Hughes, Clarke, Khawaja, Watson, Haddin, Siddle, Harris, Pattinson, Lyon. Warner's temperament is still too suspect for my liking and I've always thought that Watson fits in better in the middle order given his ability/tendency to score attacking fifties. Harris and Pattinson will likely not play all five games so the fact that there is solid back-up in Starc and Bird is a good thing.

Turning to England, in my opinion they are not the runaway favourites that everyone's making them out to be especially given how they struggled against NZ. The fitness of two of their four match-winners is still in question and were Pietersen and Swann (especially the latter) not able to pull through, the series suddenly takes on a different look. Their back-up seam bowling is also more questionable when compared to their opponents though they will be playing at home.

Starting to build up nicely this and though my early stage prediction would be a 2-1 win for the English, I'm sure I'll change my mind a few times between now and July 10 :-)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Happy New Year .....

....well almost......its only 2 months in to 2009 so I guess its not terribly late for the first post of the year :-) The end of 2008 and the beginning of 2009 has been quite engrossing primarily because of the tussle for supremacy between Australia and South Africa. And its interesting how once again, the Aussies are showing that the biggest mistake 'pundits' can make is to write them off. But I am jumping way ahead. The series in Australia was a real cracker and it was great to see the Springboks actually delivering so well on their abilities for once and not choking at the big moments. And in Steyn, Amla, de Villiers, Duminy and Morkel they have some real stars in the making and should be a strong team for some time to come. Australia's struggles on the other hand were not surprising after their performance in India. The same guys, i.e. Hayden and Lee continued to underwhelm and with the inexplicable selection of Symonds made things worse for Ricky Ponting. They were a l...
Post a Comment
Read more

Season ending review

Well, officially the season hasn't quite ended since the last one-dayer between Australia and South Africa still remains to be played but given that its a dead rubber, the season is as good as over. And what a season its been. Probably as much action off-field as on it, but its been riveting throughout and the quality of Test cricket overall (apart from the WI-Eng series) has been top-notch and a welcome reminder of why I like the 5 day format the most. The two Aus-SA series have in particular been fascinating to watch though a lot of it has been driven by Australia waiting too long to make much needed changes. South Africa though has truly come on in leaps and bounds and though they will be losing Kallis and Ntini sooner rather than later, their decreasing reliance on them over the last year or so has meant that they won't be missed much. Their one-day game has come along strongly too and they should have a genuine shot at the World Cup this time. Australia on the other hand h...
Post a Comment
Read more

Of backward selections and England's future

A couple of interesting selectorial decisions recently by England and India (and actually as its turning out Australia as well!). For once I think the England selectors didn't panic and showed the right thinking by not picking either Key or Ramprakash for the Oval Test. And luckily for them, both Bell and Trott have performed well enough to vindicate the decision. India on the other hand have actually gone the other way bringing Dravid back to the one-day squad. I'm a bit ambivalent on that one. While the decision to leave out Rohit Sharma and retain Raina was certainly the right one, bringing back Dravid is questionable. It would have been a bolder decision to pick someone like Kohli or Rahane who both played really well in the Emerging Players Trophy recently, mainly because Dravid is quite unlikely to feature in the 2011 World Cup so why bring him back now? As for the Aussies, they will certainly be regretting not picking Nathan Hauritz for the Oval. A defensive decision if...
Post a Comment
Read more