combined XI

[dr nick]

if you had these players to pick from, who would be your starting XI??

Hayden
Langer
Ponting
Lehmann
Waugh
Martyn
Gilchrist
Warne
Lee
Gillespie
McGrath

Trescothick
Vaughan
Butcher
Crawley
Hussain
Flintoff
Stewart
Gough
Giles
Caddick
Hoggard


------------

mine would be:
Hayden
Langer
Ponting
Lehmann
Waugh
Martyn
Gilchrist
Warne
Lee
Gillespie
McGrath

;)

[hourn]

Yea i would go pretty close to that too.

Even though this a pommy bagging thread ill give them some credit cause Gough would be in there for Lee, and Caddick would be in there with Gillespie as 12th man.


With the batsmen i seriously can't see any of the Poms infront of us. If M.Waugh was still there i'd probaly put Vaughn in front of him batting in the middle order and if S.Waugh didn't get that ton i may have put Hussain in but not anymore.

My team is Langer, Hayden, Ponting, Lehmann, S.Waugh, Martyn, Gilchrist, Warne, Gough, Caddick, McGrath - Gillespie.

[Brett Li]

Originally posted by nicko18
if you had these players to pick from, who would be your starting XI??

Hayden
Langer
Ponting
Lehmann
Waugh
Martyn
Gilchrist
Warne
Lee
Gillespie
McGrath

Trescothick
Vaughan
Butcher
Crawley
Hussain
Flintoff
Stewart
Gough
Giles
Caddick
Hoggard


------------

mine would be:
Hayden
Langer
Ponting
Lehmann
Waugh
Martyn
Gilchrist
Warne
Lee
Gillespie
McGrath

:o

[dr nick]

Originally posted by Brett Li


:o

lol, didnt think brett would have the guts to put up a team of his own ;)

[Brett Li]

Originally posted by nicko18


lol, didnt think brett would have the guts to put up a team of his own ;)

If you want to have a serious ashes debate, you shouldn't have fled the last thread on "England Misery". You posting this sort of pommie baiting rubbish just demonstrates how chippy you are. Did a pommy steal your girlfriend or do you have even bigger issues to deal with?....

[DaveW]

Originally posted by hourn
Yea i would go pretty close to that too.

Even though this a pommy bagging thread ill give them some credit cause Gough would be in there for Lee, and Caddick would be in there with Gillespie as 12th man.


With the batsmen i seriously can't see any of the Poms infront of us. If M.Waugh was still there i'd probaly put Vaughn in front of him batting in the middle order and if S.Waugh didn't get that ton i may have put Hussain in but not anymore.

My team is Langer, Hayden, Ponting, Lehmann, S.Waugh, Martyn, Gilchrist, Warne, Gough, Caddick, McGrath - Gillespie.

Gillespie is miles better than Caddick.

[hourn]

Originally posted by DaveW


Gillespie is miles better than Caddick.


on recent form i dont think he is. not to sure of Caddick's recent form but im almost 100 per cent sure it would be better than Gillespie, anyone bothered to check?? i cant be. i know gillespie has 26 wkts at 42 from the last 10 tests. not sure bout AC.

[hourn]

since the last test (not including) of the ashes series in 2001, Caddick has played 8 test and taken 33 wickets at 28. which isn't bad.


I also think that in general he is not far from, maybe even better than Gillespie. Caddick is one of the most underrated cricketers going around i reckon. He has a great run up and a nice high action, plenty of bounce. Good solid bowler, who doesn't get the credit he deserves.

[Brett Li]

Originally posted by nicko18


well brett, if you think this is pommie baiting, it really just shows up the standard of english cricket at the moment. that side i named is geniune, and as usual, you go and hide behind the excuse that i must have something to bear grudges with the poms about.

it is a cold hard fact. i believe every single aussie player is leap years ahead of the respective english player, in every facet of the game. no hiding behind excuses for you brett. why dont you go ahead and name a side?? or are you finding it too hard to make room for one of your guys??

I think it is an accepted fact that Australia have the best team in the world. I also think there is no debate as to who will win the Ashes this Summer, i have said this already on these boards.

I don't believe england have a bad team, we are just hit with injuries, this is a legitimate reason why team morale is low and performances have perhaps been a little lacking. I will post you my Combined Ashes Team, based on current form:

Hayden
Vaughan
Ponting
Hussain
Waugh (on reputation)
Butcher/Martyn
Gilchrist
Warne
Caddick
Gillespie
McGrath

Gough would get in that side if fit, IMHO

Now if you'll be a good bloke and answer me the following question:

what do you honestly (putting aside your anti-pom hat) think the result of a aussie/england clash, if England had Gough back and no other injuries.. and an aussie side without:

McGrath
Hayden
Ponting
Gilchrist

Would that alter the complexion of the series?

[hourn]

I would be confident going into the series with a completely new Australian team at the moment.

There is no doubt England areo n the rise but Australia are just too strong.

If our side was say Maher (c), Hussey, Hodge, Love, Katich, Clarke, Clingeleffer (k), Andy Bichel, Brad Williams, Stuart MacGill, Paul Rofe i would give them a good chance of defeating the poms in all honesty.

England are improving but as i said, Australian cricket is just so strong at the moment its incredible.

[Brett Li]

Originally posted by hourn
I would be confident going into the series with a completely new Australian team at the moment.

There is no doubt England areo n the rise but Australia are just too strong.

If our side was say Maher (c), Hussey, Hodge, Love, Katich, Clarke, Clingeleffer (k), Andy Bichel, Brad Williams, Stuart MacGill, Paul Rofe i would give them a good chance of defeating the poms in all honesty.

England are improving but as i said, Australian cricket is just so strong at the moment its incredible.

So you don't think the Poms are a bunch of cry baby whingers who wet the bed?
:D

[Richie Benaud]

England will be competitive in this Ashes series, but this marvellous Australian side will be too good in the end this summer.

[hourn]

the problems with the pommie cricket team:


1 - no spinners. Ashley Giles is second rate and may be succesful in 1st Grade cricket but not international cricket. his (not his as it was Hussains but he executed it) tactic against India was disgraceful. And if Richard Dawson is your second spinner then god help you's.

2 - middle order. the opening batters are strong (not quite as Australia, but not far off). The two teams would have four of the best five or six openers in the world IMO (maybe even the four best). But the middle order is lacking a bit now Thorpe is gone. Butcher is a battler who can grind out a good innings occasionally, Hussain is allright but overrated (like Steven Fleming IMO) and Crawley is very up and down. Flintoff at number 6 :eek: dont get me started on that problem.

The quicks are ok with Gough (even though he's been injured) and Caddick but there doesn't seem to be a great third option. Hoggard is going ok but not that great, Harmison and Jones are too young.

[hourn]

is the likely pommie team:

Vaughan
Trescothick
Butcher
Hussain
Crawley
Flintoff
Stewart
Gough
Hoggard
Giles
Caddick

??? thats seem pretty close to right. whats happened to Craig White. is he out here?? i haven't heard his name mentioned.

[Brett Li]

Originally posted by hourn
I

If our side was say Maher (c), Hussey, Hodge, Love, Katich, Clarke, Clingeleffer (k), Andy Bichel, Brad Williams, Stuart MacGill, Paul Rofe i would give them a good chance of defeating the poms in all honesty.



None of these Batters are as good as

Tresco
Hussain
Vaughan

Or Bowlers as good as:

Caddick
Gough

and maybe at a push Hoggard

I just don't see the backbone. IMHO

[dr nick]

Originally posted by Brett Li

Now if you'll be a good bloke and answer me the following question:

what do you honestly (putting aside your anti-pom hat) think the result of a aussie/england clash, if England had Gough back and no other injuries.. and an aussie side without:

McGrath
Hayden
Ponting
Gilchrist

Would that alter the complexion of the series?

i think the result would still be very one sided towards australia.

i think the current full strength squads would yield a 4-0 result, and a second string aussie team would get similar numbers (maybe 4-1 or 3-1).

but lets be honest with ourselves here brett. vaugan, flintoff and trescothick will all be playing in the first test... and there is simply no comparison with flintoff and gilchrist.
what were his batting averages last summer?? something like 14 and 19 and his bowling averages were something like 51 and 71

[hourn]

Poms will get killed on Adelaide and Sydney with their spin brigade.

Best bets for upsets are at Melbouren and Perth, where they will probably come in with four quicks and they may be able to match it with us if they have good matches - Gough, Caddick, White and Hoggard is pretty useful i reckon on their day.

Brisbane they'll get done because simply, the better team usually wins at the Gabba.

[Brett Li]

Originally posted by hourn
Poms will get killed on Adelaide and Sydney with their spin brigade.

Best bets for upsets are at Melbouren and Perth, where they will probably come in with four quicks and they may be able to match it with us if they have good matches - Gough, Caddick, White and Hoggard is pretty useful i reckon on their day.

Brisbane they'll get done because simply, the better team usually wins at the Gabba.

A fair assessment, regretfully.

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Brett Li


None of these Batters are as good as

Tresco
Hussain
Vaughan

Or Bowlers as good as:

Caddick
Gough

and maybe at a push Hoggard

I just don't see the backbone. IMHO I don't think you understand Australia's depth. A lot of those Australian second string players may not seem as good to you because they haven't proven themselves (through lack of opportunity). I would say that most of those batters named would be better than Hussain and maybe Tresco if they were playing regular test cricket. I would also put money on it that 1 or 2 of them would be better than Vaughan.

As good a captain Hussain is, his batting average is around the 37 mark. You don't stay in the Australian team if your average is less than 43/44 (Mark Waugh the exception). What makes you think Australian fringe players would not be able to achieve a paltry average of 37?

Tresco is reasonable, but vaughan is really your only good batter. Thorpe was good and Stewart was okay, but they are unavailable or old and out of form respectively.

Australia's talent doesn't drop off until outside the top 15 or so, whilst England's drops off after the first 3 or 4. Big Big difference in depth.

[Dipper]

In a combined side it's our openers who on recent form have the biggets shout but then they're up against a pair of openers who've been putting on huge stands, although Langer seems to have gone off the boil a bit.

None of the English middle order make a strong case, Thorpe would if he were here & I think Hussain is underrated but I can't believe Butcher gets a mention, he made one big score when the Ashes were lost & his whole rep seems to have grown ridiculously because of it.So maybe Hussain for Lehman who hasn't really proved himself at Test level yet, or even Vaughn for Lehamn as he's palyed down the order as well.

I can't agree with Brett over Flintoff the bloke has shown nothing to suggets that he has it in him to be a decent Test match allrounder, batsman or bowler.(maybe at 1 day level)

As for the bowlers, well Goughie once maybe but he may never play another Test, as for Caddick he is actually no9 in the world rankings whilst I don't believe dizzy is in the top ten but I know who I'd rather have & it ain't the jug eared one.


As for England I think it's going to be tough for us to know what our best side will be for the first Test, we really needed one more 3 day game.

The batting pretty much picks itself if they're all fit so it's

Vaughn
Trescothick
Butcher
Hussain
Crawley(maybe Key)
Stewart

I can't see Flintoff being ready so if he's not we either go with 6 batsmen plus Stewart or rightly or wrongly we will pick White at 7, which is what I think they'll do.

But it's the bowling where I think we'll struggle to pick the right combination, Caddick is an automatic selection for Brisbane but he's the sort of bloke who needs a lot of bowling so I'd expect him to play the warm up game in Queensland, I expect Giles to play the first Test & he'll probably get a bowl in the warm up.So somehow we have to work out who gets picked from Jones,Harmisson & Hoggard I'm not sure if they will all get picked for the warm up game but whoever doesn't can't really be expected to make the Test side but if one of them has a shocker there then it further muddies the waters.

I'd expect the bowlers to be Giles,Caddick,Hoggard & Harmison which firstly gives us a nasty tail(which was shwon today) & secondly is a shame as I think Jones offers us something that we need(pace & a bit of heart/character) but I fear he'll be the one to miss out.

As for which Test offer us the best hope I fully see whwre Hourn is coming from you do doubt us at Adelaide & Sydney (Brissy as well) & in theory our best chances are at Perth & Melbourne.

But Perth is never a happy hunting ground for us we always seem to get rolled over there far too easily & whilst we've won 3 of the last 4 Melbourne Tests you wonder how long we can keep that run going.

Adleaide always seems hard work for us as it is pretty much a flat batting pitch & we don't seem to have the sort of penetration required to take wickets there(although we won there 2 series ago), paradoxily Sydney may offer us some hope if we bat first as it tends to turn a bit late on & Giles may actually get quite excited seeing the ball move laterally (surely a rare occurance for him).

It'd be great if we could get off to a good start at Brisbane, in theory it should be an ok ground for us the pace men always seem to get a bit of swing there but for some reason Warne's record there is sensational despite it having no real reputation as a spinners pitch.

Without wishing to sound like a defeatist pom I'd be fairly happy if we really 'competed' throughout the series, I'd actually be happier losing 5-0 but really going close in most of the Tests & putting up a fight with individual players coming away from it with decent figures & reputations enhanced rather than losing 3-1,4-1 or 3-2 getting absolutely stuffed in most of the Tests & then winning a dead Test with all the players going mad, grabbing stumps, saluting the barmy army & then talking about a revival starting & then rewriting history to say how witha bit of luck the series could have been levelled as they did last time.

[bluechampion]

That's got to be the most reasonable assessment of the English yet.

The thing the England side really lacks is the ability to maintain pressure on the opposition. Your main strike bowler is Gough, who has not played in a year. Hoggard is a good bowler, but more of a containing bowler, and Caddick is a bit of both (when bowling well). The youngsters are attacking, but inexperienced. But they all lack the ability to maintain pressure for long periods. They do not threaten to dismiss with every ball (as McGrath and Warne do). They are then backed up by quite reasonable spinners who bowl too many bad balls and all-rounders who appear to be solid but unspectacular (in their bowling, they're both pretty good batsmen when on-song).

Pressure is where the Aussies have it over every other side. They can pressure the opposition into making mistakes through their consistency. When New Zealand puts the Aussies under pressure (by thinking and planning) they struggle.

This is what the English need. Consistency in performance to produce pressure. Not one or two spectacular sessions.

[McAlmanac]

Originally posted by DIPPER
Sydney may offer us some hope if we bat first as it tends to turn a bit late on & Giles may actually get quite excited seeing the ball move laterally (surely a rare occurance for him).

Is there really no better spinner in England than Giles? Makes Phil Edmonds look like Bishen Bedi.

[BMD]

DIPPER,

Terrific assessment of England and their chances.

A lot of people on here overrating Oz's second stringers in my view. Test match experience counts for an awful lot. If McGrath gets injured I'm suddenly a lot less confident. Warne is just as important but MacGill would cover him well enough. England don't have a clue against legspin as a rule.

[EagleBlue]

Hayden
Trescothic
Ponting
Hussain
S.Waugh
Martyn
Gilchrist
Warne
Gillespie
Gough (If fit, if not Caddick)
McGrath

[Dipper]

Originally posted by EagleBlue
Hayden
Trescothic
Ponting
Hussain
S.Waugh
Martyn
Gilchrist
Warne
Gillespie
Gough (If fit, if not Caddick)
McGrath

This combined II is actually pretty much the best you could hope for from an English point of view & I fully admit it's one that gives us all the 50/50 calls.(After last summer you could maybe swap Vaughn for Trescothick which would then give you a rht/lft hand opening pair).

The current match gives me some heart for the series & I'm really pleased that Jones' performance has hopefully proved my prediction wrong that he may miss out for the 1st Test, I don't know how well he bowled but he took 5 wickets, he's always gonna go for a few but I feel that someone like him can dismiss a top class batsmen even when he's well set & he can hopefully take out the tail for not many with his inswingers bowled at a good pace.

So basically I have a litle bit of confidencew now, I suppose Harmison will miss out so Hoggard, Jones & Caddick will be our pace attack & despite the news of Flintoff's fitness I expect White to play ahead of him.White is actually one of our best players of spin which would help our tail against Warnie trouble is I can't see him surviving against McGrath (& Gillespie).Key is making a challenge & may get in ahead of Crawley or even Butcher assuming that Vaughn is fit otherwise he'll get in anyway but I have grave reservations aout him making runs against the Aussie attack.

[Dipper]

Originally posted by McAlmanac

Is there really no better spinner in England than Giles? Makes Phil Edmonds look like Bishen Bedi.


Well there probably is but not by much & at least Giles gives us a few runs & can bowl a (cough...cough) disciplined spell ie round the wicket outside leg stump:( , most of our pacemen are mugs with the bat so he gets the nod for his ability to score a few(he makes a few 30/40s at Test level & has made first class centuries).

Ah Phillipe Edmonds wasn't he part of the 85 Ashes winning side.:D (I remember Border giving him the charge & getting stumped by a mile)

[dr nick]

Shane Warne has put his 2 cents worth in todays paper by naming his combined XI

http://www.dailytelegraph.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,5392491%255E2771,00.html

i think the main point to take out of that is
"In truth, if the question was "Would any England player get in the current Aussie team?" the answer would probably be no."

[davers11]

I would say that a full strength England side is the second best side in the world have a look.........


Trescothick
Vaughn
Thorpe
Hussain
Butcher
Stewart
Flintoff
Gough
Caddick
Jones
Harmison

I would say that with that side the poms would beat most teams in the world and would also have a good mix of youth and experience. The thing lacking is a quality spinner and they might give Australia a good run in a few years!

[Eago77]

Originally posted by DaveW


Gillespie is miles better than Caddick.

Agree 100%.

My team would be:

Hayden
Langer
Ponting
Hussain
Waugh
Martyn
Gilchrist
Warne
Gough
Gillespie
McGrath

Martyn would be the only player out of this XI that would maybe be questioned IMO. The rest pick themselves.

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by davers11
I would say that a full strength England side is the second best side in the world have a look.........


Trescothick
Vaughn
Thorpe
Hussain
Butcher
Stewart
Flintoff
Gough
Caddick
Jones
Harmison

I would say that with that side the poms would beat most teams in the world and would also have a good mix of youth and experience. The thing lacking is a quality spinner and they might give Australia a good run in a few years!

England are there abouts, but there isn't a case for clear cut second. They seem to be on the same level as South Africa or Sri Lanka. It's hard to say anything definate, except that the group that is vying for second is still a long way off Australia's standard.

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by nicko18
Shane Warne has put his 2 cents worth in todays paper by naming his combined XI

http://www.dailytelegraph.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,5392491%255E2771,00.html

i think the main point to take out of that is
"In truth, if the question was "Would any England player get in the current Aussie team?" the answer would probably be no."

You've been rumbled mate. It seems you do read the Tele:

Originally posted by nicko18
and bunsen burner, its about time you started reading the SMH, as opposed to that rag. [/B]

It seems you preached something in your past debate that you didn't practice yourself. If you're going to debate something, you should at least make statements that you believe in.

[bunsen burner]

Whilst on the subject of the Daily Telegraph, this is an outrageous statement that I found on p55:

"....England's Ashes party after a they went within 5 runs of an upset victory over WA yesterday"

Upset??????? I don't know who wrote this, but it is fair to say that they don't know too much about cricket.

[DaveW]

Originally posted by Brett Li


None of these Batters are as good as

Tresco
Hussain
Vaughan

Or Bowlers as good as:

Caddick
Gough

and maybe at a push Hoggard

I just don't see the backbone. IMHO

Whilst its difficult to compare regular Test players (in England's case) to first class players who can't get into a Test side due to simple lack of opportunities (Australia's 2nd tier players), I don't think it is unreasonable to suggest the likes of Katich, Maher, Love, Hodge etc. are better batsmen than the likes of Vaughan and Trescothick.

Whilst Vaughan and Trescothick are proving their worth for the English Test side, their first-class record make rather modest reading, averaging 37 and 34 respectively. Compare this to the aforementioned Australian batsmen who have first-class averages well into the 40s. This despite the fact they play in a much tougher domestic competition (in fact every season we see a whole handful of Australian batsman dominating in county cricket, even a guy like Murray Goodwin who struggles at shield level). If Vaughan and Trescothick played in Australia they would be much lower down in the pecking order, and IMO would be struggling to get a game for a state side.

[Brett Li]

"On the way to England last year, Glenn McGrath stood on the beach at Gallipoli and boldly declared England could not win the Ashes back because they did not believe they could. It made headlines over there and it put a lot of England noses out of joint."

What utter sensationalist, outdated, unhelpful rubbish. This is truly sick making.........

[larrikin]

Originally posted by Eago77


Agree 100%.

My team would be:

Hayden
Langer
Ponting
Hussain
Waugh
Martyn
Gilchrist
Warne
Gough
Gillespie
McGrath

Martyn would be the only player out of this XI that would maybe be questioned IMO. The rest pick themselves.
Martyn has a higher test average than Langer, Ponting, Hussain and I think Waugh. His record over the past 18 months is amongst the best of all the Aussie batters (5 centuries), and all of this from number 6.

[Kenny_01]

Originally posted by larrikin

Martyn has a higher test average than Langer, Ponting, Hussain and I think Waugh. His record over the past 18 months is amongst the best of all the Aussie batters (5 centuries), and all of this from number 6.

Spot on.

[bunsen burner]

I really have to question people who have put Hussein into the side?????

He is an excellent captain and is IMO the biggest contribution to the rise if English cricket. BUT, as Steve Waugh would be captain, and with the rest of the side not needing a figure like Hussein to motivate them, we could only assume he would be picked on his batting ability.

Hussein has an average of 37! Surely he would not be worthy of a spot in a combined XI? Especially when Vaughan has an average that is 10 better.

[bunsen burner]

Just out of interest, here are the batting averages of the current test players from either side with Thorpe added in. The English batsmen have asterisks in front of them so they can be distinguished easily. Batting averages aren't everything when picking a test side, but there are gaps big enough to just about leave it in no doubt who would make the team.


Gilchrist 58.51
Hayden 50.00
Waugh 49.91
Martyn 48.00
* Vaughan 47.50
Ponting 47.49
Langer 43.50
* Trescothick 43.37
* Thorpe 41.87
* Stewart 39.99
* Hussain 37.15
* Crawley 34.12
* Butcher 33.13
Lehmann 28.50

I would say from the figures that the only English batsman guarunteed of a spot is Vaughan. Langer and Trescothick have almost identical averages, but at this stage you would have to give langer the nod because often the opening pairing is more important than the individuals on their own.

This is my combined XI:

1) Hayden
2) Langer
3) Ponting
4) Martyn
5) Waugh (c)
6) Vaughan
7) Gilchrist
8) Warne
9) Gillespie
10) Gough
11) McGrath

Here are the bowling averages. Bowling averages don't measure performance as well as batting averages, but once again, when you have a look at them, the 4 bowlers with the best averages pretty much pick themselves.

McGrath 21.52
Warne 25.73
Gillespie 26.36
* Gough 27.57
Lee 27.94
* Caddick 29.48
Bichel 29.66
* Hoggard 31.43
* White 37.15
* Flintoff 47.15

[dr nick]

Originally posted by bunsen burner


You've been rumbled mate. It seems you do read the Tele:



It seems you preached something in your past debate that you didn't practice yourself. If you're going to debate something, you should at least make statements that you believe in.

i sometimes visit www.news.com.au if you are suggesting i read piers ackerman, robert craddock, jon pierek, peter frilingos etc... guess again. but i will read articles from steve waugh, glenn mcgrath and shane warne.

im not sure if you occasionally pick up the SMH, but i think if you give it a try for about a week, you will really notice the difference.

i only started buying the SMH since just before the bulldogs scandal, and the difference in their jounalism is marked. far less opinionated, and a LOT more factual. though i did take notice in one daily telegraph poll "should mark waugh have been dropped??" Yes 8%, No 92% (or something like that, but it is a NSW paper ;))

[bunsen burner]

I don't buy SMH because it is a broadsheet (sizewise). To much of a pain in the a ss to open it up. Stuff drops out everywhere.

I don't read any of the crap from the journos that you mentioned. I'm after news and facts, not opinion. I perfectly understand that SMH is much more factful than the Tele. But, I take what I read in the Tele with a pinch of salt. I am aware that their articles are biased. I quite often read the Tele and pick up on stuff they have written that is either wrong, uninformed, or shamelessly biased. I think I posted one such thing a few posts ago.

[DaveW]

Originally posted by nicko18


i sometimes visit www.news.com.au if you are suggesting i read piers ackerman, robert craddock, jon pierek, peter frilingos etc... guess again. but i will read articles from steve waugh, glenn mcgrath and shane warne.


wouldn't the former lot be the likely ghosts of the latter lot?

[dr nick]

Originally posted by DaveW


wouldn't the former lot be the likely ghosts of the latter lot?

they probably are, but that doesnt stop them from writing sensationalist speculative dribble.

[dr nick]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
I don't buy SMH because it is a broadsheet (sizewise). To much of a pain in the a ss to open it up. Stuff drops out everywhere.

I don't read any of the crap from the journos that you mentioned. I'm after news and facts, not opinion. I perfectly understand that SMH is much more factful than the Tele. But, I take what I read in the Tele with a pinch of salt. I am aware that their articles are biased. I quite often read the Tele and pick up on stuff they have written that is either wrong, uninformed, or shamelessly biased. I think I posted one such thing a few posts ago.

i must admit that is by far the biggest disadvantage of the herald. there is no way you can open it up and read it on a bus.
i think a lot of the tele journos have their own agendas to push. the baseless fudging of statistics and slander that has been used to promote rugby league is beyond belief, and i have noticed that the level of uninformed commentary is rampant. i cant recall distinct examples, but many a time i have i have known far more about a particular sport than the journalists that are paid to cover it.

[wagstaff]

Originally posted by hourn

I also think that in general he is not far from, maybe even better than Gillespie. Caddick is one of the most underrated cricketers going around i reckon. He has a great run up and a nice high action, plenty of bounce. Good solid bowler, who doesn't get the credit he deserves.

Caddick is underrated somewhat but he let himself down badly in the last Ashes contest. It seemed that this was the perfect setting for him to finally show his wares against Australia and he didn't do it, Australians were simply too good for him.

[wagstaff]

Not so sure why Langer is considered to be automatically ahead of Trescothick and Vaughan. Statistically speaking, his Test record isn't clearly better then either of the two English openers.

And I know that Langer and Hayden have been bracketed together as a successful opening partnership but for me Hayden has been the far more impressive one of the two. It's easily forgotten that Langer had a few slices of luck early in his career as an opener:

- He should've been out LBW for 0 of the Brisbane Test against New Zealand last summer in one of the more notorious decisions of the season. Langer went on to score a century.

- Was dropped (an easy one) when on 0 against New Zealand in Hobart last summer. He went on to score a century.

- Was dropped first ball in the first Test of the recent series against Pakistan. Went on to score 72.

And apart from these incidents, Hayden has overall looked far more impressive then Langer, certainly worthy of his status as the world's best batsman. To use one example, compare the sweep shots of Hayden and Langer. Hayden's sweep shot has become one of the best in world cricket - safe and a potent run-scorer. Langer's sweep shot never convinces and he has been out plenty of times playing the shot.

[dr nick]

after a bit more research and watching some of the poms in action... here is my amended team

Marcus Trescothick
Matthew Hayden
Ricky Ponting
Mark Butcher
Nasser Hussain
Michael Vaughan
Adam Gilchrist
Shane Warne
Andrew Caddick
Matthew Hoggard
Glenn McGrath

had to fiddle with the batting line-up, coz i think that both england openers would be good enough to make the side, but we have hayden. from the look of him, vaughan wouldnt go too badly down at #6. captain of this team would be a toss up between ponting and gilchrist.

unlucky players to miss out include langer and gillespie (his injury influenced my decision here). to be frank, our middle order looks a bit weak at the moment, hence why the english are filling up most of the batting line-up.

[Zombie]

Some of you people have absolutely no clue when it comes to cricket, no English player would fit into the Australian side, none. Australia have probably about 10 batsmen better than the best English batsman (Thorpe) and 5 pace bowlers better than the best English pace bowler (Gough).

Only a couple of player from the English side would get into the Australian A side, absolutely none would make it into the Australian side and wouldn't even be close.

It may make a combined team a bit boring, but that is the way it is.

[Zombie]

Originally posted by nicko18
after a bit more research and watching some of the poms in action... here is my amended team

Marcus Trescothick
Matthew Hayden
Ricky Ponting
Mark Butcher
Nasser Hussain
Michael Vaughan
Adam Gilchrist
Shane Warne
Andrew Caddick
Matthew Hoggard
Glenn McGrath

had to fiddle with the batting line-up, coz i think that both england openers would be good enough to make the side, but we have hayden. from the look of him, vaughan wouldnt go too badly down at #6. captain of this team would be a toss up between ponting and gilchrist.

unlucky players to miss out include langer and gillespie (his injury influenced my decision here). to be frank, our middle order looks a bit weak at the moment, hence why the english are filling up most of the batting line-up.

Seriously, you no nothing about cricket and shouldn't comment on it.

Butcher 38 (first class average)
Hussain 42
Vaugh 37
Trescothick 34

The following players would easily get a game before any of those 4:

Langer 51
M.Waugh 53
S.Waugh 52
Lehmann 57
Martyn 49
Bevan 56
Hussey 50
Katich 49
Love 49

The following players would also be selected ahead of them:

Elliot 49
Slater 42
Cox 45
DiVenuto 42
Blewett 47
Maher 44
Law 50


The 3 players you mentioned would struggle to make a 3rd string Australian side.

[clucas91]

I would pick Darren Gough over Brett Lee any day.

[dr nick]

Originally posted by Zombie


Seriously, you no nothing about cricket and shouldn't comment on it.

Butcher 38 (first class average)
Hussain 42
Vaugh 37
Trescothick 34

The following players would easily get a game before any of those 4:

Langer 51
M.Waugh 53
S.Waugh 52
Lehmann 57
Martyn 49
Bevan 56
Hussey 50
Katich 49
Love 49

The following players would also be selected ahead of them:

Elliot 49
Slater 42
Cox 45
DiVenuto 42
Blewett 47
Maher 44
Law 50


The 3 players you mentioned would struggle to make a 3rd string Australian side.

you are embarrasing yourself.

according to you, allan border would make the side. he has a higher first class average too.

and putting mark waugh and darren gough in the mix was just the bomb.

vaughan and trescothick are in much better form than langer.

it is plainly obvious that you didnt hear about the recent india series. :rolleyes:


i would have to suggest you are the one who knows nothing about the game, and are an embarrasement to yourself

[dr nick]

last 10 matches:

M Trescothick - 881 runs @ 55.06
J Langer - 730 runs @ 45.62

N Hussain - 758 runs @ 50.53
D Martyn - 656 runs @ 50.46

M Butcher - 727 runs @ 45.43
S Waugh - 445 runs @ 31.78

M Vaughan - 1031 runs @ 64.43
D Lehmann - not even close, barely can make our current side, let alone a combined side, head to head against england's best batter.





A Caddick - 37 wickets @ 33.81
J Gillespie - 26 wickets @ 42.46

M Hoggard - 45 wickets @ 30.75
B Lee - 32 wickets @ 35.78

[Zombie]

Originally posted by nicko18
last 10 matches:

M Trescothick - 881 runs @ 55.06
J Langer - 730 runs @ 45.62

N Hussain - 758 runs @ 50.53
D Martyn - 656 runs @ 50.46

M Butcher - 727 runs @ 45.43
S Waugh - 445 runs @ 31.78

M Vaughan - 1031 runs @ 64.43
D Lehmann - not even close, barely can make our current side, let alone a combined side, head to head against england's best batter.

A Caddick - 37 wickets @ 33.81
J Gillespie - 26 wickets @ 42.46

M Hoggard - 45 wickets @ 30.75
B Lee - 32 wickets @ 35.78

Who cares???? Put them up against quality opposition and they crumble, all out for 79!!! Australia are that much better than England that alot of players that can't make the Australian side would easily be the best players if they played for England. Alot of the English team would find it hard to get a game for Australian State sides let alone a combined Aus-Eng side.

There is not one player that would fit into the Australian side if they were Australian citizens, not one, and not by a long way either.

[bunsen burner]

As often the case in debates, there seems to be a discrepency about time.

Are we talking about hypothetical combined side that would play 1 test match tomorrow against a hypothetical rest of the world XI?

or

Are we talking about a hypothetical combined side that we would have as a test side for a length of time?


I picked my side on the second option as selectors pick sides with a foresight of more than the next test. If I had used the first option, my side would have been slightly different.

[larrikin]

Originally posted by nicko18
last 10 matches:
D Martyn - 656 runs @ 50.46
M Butcher - 727 runs @ 45.43

So on what basis did you pick Butcher over Martyn?

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Brett Li


None of these Batters are as good as

Tresco
Hussain
Vaughan

Or Bowlers as good as:

Caddick
Gough

and maybe at a push Hoggard

I just don't see the backbone. IMHO Thoughts anyone?

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Brett Li



Now if you'll be a good bloke and answer me the following question:

what do you honestly (putting aside your anti-pom hat) think the result of a aussie/england clash, if England had Gough back and no other injuries.. and an aussie side without:

McGrath
Hayden
Ponting
Gilchrist

Would that alter the complexion of the series? Do you still think that England are better than Australia's second team?

Any thoughts Brett?