The Ashes 2019

[littlebabyjesus]

Very casual cricket fan here.

What's the difference in selecting players? I mean I know the difference between one day cricket and test matches in terms of rules and presumably patience over big hitting, but how does this translate to picking a test team? Who from.the WC winners misses out on the Ashes, and why?

Rashid. He's mostly a one-day specialist nowadays, and when batsmen don't have to take risks against him, he's much less of a threat. Conversely, while Moeen takes few wickets in odis, he has a knack for taking them in tests, which is a bit odd in some ways - 'he'll be disappointed with that' is often the refrain about the shot played when Moeen gets a wicket, but it happens a lot, especially in England where he has an excellent record.

Roy is a dasher. In tests, the ball is different - it swings and seams more and for longer, then it has time to wear and produce reverse swing later on. Plus, your best bowlers can bowl for longer. Dashers don't always work out, but they do sometimes - D Warner, for instance. Can Roy succeed in tests? We don't know but we all appear to have some doubts.

Woakes has had times in tests when he hasn't presented much of a threat with the ball, but at his very best, he's good. He needs to be up near 140 ks though. Mid-130s, he's not much of a threat.

Archer, Wood - no reason at all they can't reproduce odi success in tests.

Morgan failed as a test batsman - he had a good go and was found wanting.

 

[Idaho]

Not sure why we would go for a new keeper with Foakes when we already have Buttler and Bairstow. But then I know nothing of him. Is he good enough with the bat?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Foakes is a decent batsman. Has a test century. Is a considerably better keeper than Bairstow or Buttler. Depends if you want someone able to stand up to the spinners or not. B&B do and will miss chances standing up.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Very casual cricket fan here.

What's the difference in selecting players? I mean I know the difference between one day cricket and test matches in terms of rules and presumably patience over big hitting, but how does this translate to picking a test team? Who from.the WC winners misses out on the Ashes, and why?

A point re bowling. Perhaps paradoxically, in tests, when bowlers are attacking much more, there is less need for variety. Odi bowlers like Plunkett have developed a range of slower deliveries, cutters, etc, which would be of little use most of the time in tests, cos they're designed to deceive a batsman trying to score off every ball. In tests, hitting that 'corridor of uncertainty' ball after ball is the route to success. Wobbling the ball on a good length on or just outside off stump. In odis, that kind of ball can go for six.

So there are definitely different skills.

 

[Steel Icarus]

So there are definitely different skills.

Yeah, I thought that might be the case, but I didn't know if the same players would be able to adapt styles etc or if it required different players in some circumstances.

 

[Teaboy]

Foakes is a fantastic keeper and it made a lot of sense in Sri Lanka when we had up to 3 spinners playing at a time. If the pitches for the ashes are anything like the WC we'll play 1 spinner maximum.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Yeah, I thought that might be the case, but I didn't know if the same players would be able to adapt styles etc or if it required different players in some circumstances.

I guess it's a case of some being able to do both, others being better at one than the other.

We all think Archer can do it in tests, but he has a range of skills developed in T20 as well. That wide he bowled first up in the super over. He intended to bowl out there, just got it about an inch wrong. The wide yorker is a ball that's come from t20, and is basically designed to restrict the batsman to just one, or perhaps two, runs. But it's very unlikely to get a wicket - it would be total rubbish in tests.

 

[Idaho]

Foakes is a decent batsman. Has a test century. Is a considerably better keeper than Bairstow or Buttler. Depends if you want someone able to stand up to the spinners or not. B&B do and will miss chances standing up.

One part time spinner who usual picks up wickets from batters slogging the dog ball... Do we really need that much keeper finesse?

 

[Zapp Brannigan]

When I picked my team I toyed with the idea of picking a specialist keeper (Foakes), or Wood who seems the unluckiest to miss out. But in both cases, it was instead of an opener - the classic "we have one spot to fill, who's the next best player", not who's the best opener.

Picking either ends up with a middle order batsman opening, our destructive 5-7 playing 4-6 with Root at 3, or Bairstow in the top 3, or any other number of players away from their optimum positions. It's Paul Scholes on the left wing basically.

 

[Casual Observer]

Archer, Wood - no reason at all they can't reproduce odi success in tests.

Bowling 10 overs a day twice a week in ODIs is one thing. Bowling 15-20 overs a day for 2 innings across 4-5 days is another, especially with back-to-back tests. Horses for courses and all that. Archer is uniquely talented and physically able but I doubt he'll stay injury free across 5 matches (much as I'd like him too). Wood, with a history of ankle problems, definitely won't with the aforementioned workload.

 

[Teaboy]

One part time spinner who usual picks up wickets from batters slogging the dog ball... Do we really need that much keeper finesse?

Foakes was pretty reliable with the bat over the winter. Of course this then begs the question if he is the best keeper and reliable with the bat should he be 1st choice ahead of both Bairstow and Butler? If so do they play as specialist batsman and if so where in the order? If they don't play, who does?

Quite frankly England's batting is a mess at the moment, it's pretty much the opposite of settled. Its for this reason that despite the weaknesses the aussies have and it being English conditions I still think this could be a tricky ashes for England. Its just hard to see where are runs are going to come from.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Bowling 10 overs a day twice a week in ODIs is one thing. Bowling 15-20 overs a day for 2 innings across 4-5 days is another, especially with back-to-back tests. Horses for courses and all that. Archer is uniquely talented and physically able but I doubt he'll stay injury free across 5 matches (much as I'd like him too). Wood, with a history of ankle problems, definitely won't with the aforementioned workload.

True, but with that action, Archer should be ok. He's a Rolls-Royce, like Rabada. Wood is more like Shoaib Akhtar - straining every sinew and likely to pop any second.

Captaincy is crucial in that. If Wood plays, he needs short, sharp bursts. Too many captains in the past have misunderstood their fast bowlers' needs - Malcolm used to be flogged by Gooch, for instance, as if it were somehow a moral failing not to be able to bowl seven on the trot.

My thought on Wood is that he's only going to get so many gos. Shame to waste the times when he is fit by not picking him.

 

[kabbes]

What about Nick Browne? Essex are doing well and he’s always been able to put together a good knock as well as being quite consistent in terms of survival.

He’s obviously not going to set the world on fire but we’re scraping the barrel for openers here.

 

[Zapp Brannigan]

Quite frankly England's batting is a mess at the moment, it's pretty much the opposite of settled. Its for this reason that despite the weaknesses the aussies have and it being English conditions I still think this could be a tricky ashes for England. Its just hard to see where are runs are going to come from.

Root can score fluently, big hundreds and batting long. Bairstow and Buttler are fluent stroke players and will contribute heavily. Stokes, depending on circumstances, is capable of either of those roles. A "tail" including Woakes and Moeen can extend an innings a long way.

All of that needs a platform though. Root keeps having to come in before the ball is 15 overs old, he's not an opener. Bairstow and Buttler don't get to play the strokes when rebuilding at 60-4, Stokes gets stuck playing the anchor role, and tailenders who bat are good for adding another 50-60 quickly on an already good score - not grinding past 200.

Openers, openers, my kingdom for some openers. If we can regularly get Root in at 4 no earlier than 30 overs, there are plenty of runs to be had. If not, I don't fancy our chances.

 

[planetgeli]

I don't think the days of 30-3 have gone away. A lot of teams, not just us, have seen a good amount of runs in the last couple of years coming from 6-11. On that basis alone Woakes has to come into consideration.

Stokes is maturing well. I see a lot of him knocking it around for singles and twos. Ending up 80 not out. Saw good quotes from him today regarding those last two balls in the final. He was thinking don't get out, don't get caught on the boundary. Brought up a Bangladesh defeat in the ICC trophy. He was thinking. These are good signs.

 

[planetgeli]

Also Bayliss on Stokes.
"I don't want this to be taken out of context but he's a real fighter."

 

[littlebabyjesus]

When Stokes first came into the England team, everyone at Durham was saying that he's a batter who bowls, not a bowler who bats. I think perhaps his mid-30s batting average made us doubt that, but mid-30s at Durham is extremely good. We're really seeing it now - let's face it, he's technically better than many of England's specialists.

 

[Zapp Brannigan]

Technically Stokes is good, but it's the mental aspect which set him apart. We all know he can hit a ball (South Africa certainly do) but he's far more adept at reading the game and playing to suit nowadays.

Sunday was a case in point. By the 50 overs he (understandably) looked mentally shattered, like he was about to keel over. Yet still he was playing smart shots.

 

[Idaho]

... should he be 1st choice ahead of both Bairstow and Butler? If so do they play as specialist batsman and if so where in the order? If they don't play, who does?

The question is, if you were Australia or any other team, how do you feel about your tired bowlers facing Buttler and Bairstow at 3pm on a hot Saturday? They are both devastating attacking batters. Definitely in the top 10, arguably top 5 middle order batters in the world.

 

[redsquirrel]

Very casual cricket fan here.

What's the difference in selecting players? I mean I know the difference between one day cricket and test matches in terms of rules and presumably patience over big hitting, but how does this translate to picking a test team? Who from.the WC winners misses out on the Ashes, and why?

What LBJ said, plus you don't have the same fielding restrictions in first class cricket.

Some players can transfer (Root, Kholi, Smith) others are more specialist (Anderson, Southee, Compton).

One of the big changes is that whereas in white ball cricket it is often advantageous for the bowler to mix it up, in first class cricket many of the top bowlers are those that can basically bowl the same ball all day.

 

[Lord Camomile]

Also Bayliss on Stokes.
"...he's a real fighter."

Appalling comment

 

[littlebabyjesus]

What LBJ said, plus you don't have the same fielding restrictions in first class cricket.

Some players can transfer (Root, Kholi, Smith) others are more specialist (Anderson, Southee, Compton).

One of the big changes is that whereas in white ball cricket it is often advantageous for the bowler to mix it up, in first class cricket many of the top bowlers are those that can basically bowl the same ball all day.

Yep. Some can transfer, others not. What you can't do is play the same way in tests and odis. I guess Sehwag came close, but generally it doesn't work.

 

[Idaho]

Yep. Some can transfer, others not.

Not every player can be Ronnie Irani.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Not every player can be Ronnie Irani.

Repeat after me. The 1990s did not happen. The 1990s did not happen.

 

[Idaho]

Repeat after me. The 1990s did not happen. The 1990s did not happen.

That's when I started following England! The 1993 ashes series, turning on the TV to watch the ball of the century.

 

[kabbes]

Irani, Ealham. Genuine all-rounders, both. Equally awful with bat and ball.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Irani, Ealham, Pringle, Lewis...

The New Bothams. Rubbish band.

 

[Casual Observer]

Anyone read Pringle's book? Had him down as an underachieving bogey eater but apparently it's quite good. Not much cricket in there but supposedly plenty of Peter Cook stories. Am tempted for that reason alone.

 

[Idaho]

Irani, Ealham, Pringle, Lewis...

The New Bothams. Rubbish band.

Lewis was at least a reasonable bowler.

 

[planetgeli]

Anyone read Pringle's book? Had him down as an underachieving bogey eater but apparently it's quite good. Not much cricket in there but supposedly plenty of Peter Cook stories. Am tempted for that reason alone.

He's a half decent sports writer. Nothing to do with anything but I spent my graduation day getting completely (I passed out) rat arsed with his sister who was a good laugh.