Australia v Sri Lanka; 2nd Test @ Manuka Oval Feb 1-5.

[Sproj]

Starc at his best is quite possibly the most unplayable bowler in world cricket. Starc at his worst is as pop gun as Mitch Marsh.

If only he could get his worst to go a few levels up, he'd be essential to the bowling line up.

If only Pattinson was fit, then between him, Cummins, Richardson and Starc, the batting would basically allow you to play five bowlers.

 

[Charlie_s123]

Good ball and a better spell from Starc towards the end but can we at least plan smart going to England for once?

Starc has shown he's not very good over there as it is, he's not suited to it and given he's not at his best and averages nearly 30 with the ball he should not be a certain starter. Our only hope of winning is to out bowl them and put a few decent innings together with guys who aren't completely suspect in those conditions. Burns is one so he can't play, Head probably is but has earned the chance to at least have a shot, Patterson is probably the other who'll play at 6, all this pending on Shield form of course.

As for the bowlers, the starters should be Cummins, Hazlewood and Richardson with reserve options being Siddle, Starc and one other such as Sayers/Behrendorff/Tremain.

Starc can be an option if there's a flat wicket on offer like Lords/The Oval depending on how they shape up compared to last time.

If Siddle is bowing in the Ashes, I’ll be seriously concerned.

Edit: Had to temper my reaction to Siddle being suggested for Ashes.

 

[to1994]

Given the complete dearth of good batting this summer before this series, writing off Burns as a can't play when he's just made 180 seems a bit much.

I know Sri Lanka are rubbish and I know that his technique could well be found wanting there, but the cupboard is still pretty bare so it's not like we're blessed for ready made alternatives that are without doubt a better option.

If you want to give Burns a go in England it has to be at 5 or 6. He cannot open the batting with his current technique and I really hope the selectors don't stick by the stupid "don't change a winning team" mantra that has led us into most of our messes in recent times. Burns' runs should count less then Shield runs when it comes down to it so it really needs to come down to who performs in the final 4 Shield games.

If everyone fails and only Burns stands up in those games then a case can be made but I feel like people just go "he's scored 180 Test runs, he's a lock" and don't think about anything else. It's part of why we've failed to win in England for over 15 years.

 

[Park cricketer]

Gee the Karunaratne injury looked nasty, that could cause a vertebral dislocation. Hope he's fine, evoked some bad memories that injury.

Starc should be coming at first change. Starc's special ability is that he clocks 147k+ clicks very easily with good frequency. Not many bowlers in world cricket have that ability. His issue is that he doesn't have a regular stock ball, in the channel one that pacers bowl day in day out. Which is why Cummins should take the new ball and Starc should look to emulate Johnson's late career high and bowl intimidating lines. Such intimidating bowling at his pace would be extremely difficult to face rather than when he tries to swing the ball.

 

[to1994]

If Siddle is bowing in the Ashes, I’ll be seriously concerned.

Edit: Had to temper my reaction to Siddle being suggested for Ashes.

Short memories, he went to England last time and we refused to play him for 4 Tests despite it being obvious he was suited to the conditions. Finally gave him a go when it was too late and he was our best bowler. I'm adamanant that Siddle shouldn't near the Test side in Australia and he shouldn't have played in the UAE. But in England on pitches like the one Broad ran through us for 60 he's a weapon and I'd be happy to have him at least as the reserve for those. Probably a little bit past it now so a Sayers/Richardson would be the preferred option.

 

[Charlie_s123]

Gee the Karunaratne injury looked nasty, that could cause a vertebral dislocation. Hope he's fine, evoked some bad memories that injury.

Starc should be coming at first change. Starc's special ability is that he clocks 147k+ clicks very easily with good frequency. Not many bowlers in world cricket have that ability. His issue is that he doesn't have a regular stock ball, in the channel one that pacers bowl day in day out. Which is why Cummins should take the new ball and Starc should look to emulate Johnson's late career high and bowl intimidating lines. Such intimidating bowling at his pace would be extremely difficult to face rather than when he tries to swing the ball.

Seems like it might have been a nerve in his shoulder thankfully.

 

[Doss]

If you want to give Burns a go in England it has to be at 5 or 6. He cannot open the batting with his current technique and I really hope the selectors don't stick by the stupid "don't change a winning team" mantra that has led us into most of our messes in recent times. Burns' runs should count less then Shield runs when it comes down to it so it really needs to come down to who performs in the final 4 Shield games.

If everyone fails and only Burns stands up in those games then a case can be made but I feel like people just go "he's scored 180 Test runs, he's a lock" and don't think about anything else. It's part of why we've failed to win in England for over 15 years.

I don't think he should be a lock, but I also don't think he should be in the no way pile either.

I don't mind the suggestion of middle order for him.

 

[Richard Pryor]

Short memories, he went to England last time and we refused to play him for 4 Tests despite it being obvious he was suited to the conditions. Finally gave him a go when it was too late and he was our best bowler. I'm adamanant that Siddle shouldn't near the Test side in Australia and he shouldn't have played in the UAE. But in England on pitches like the one Broad ran through us for 60 he's a weapon and I'd be happy to have him at least as the reserve for those. Probably a little bit past it now so a Sayers/Richardson would be the preferred option.

Not sure about his recent form, but would think Jackson Bird would fit in well in English conditions.

 

[gbatman]

A lot of whinging about it being a road yet they will probably collapse and we will win by an innings+. Yes we have to bowl well to get wickets but so be it.

Nice to see Starc with his pace back, where has that been all summer?

 

[Scorpus]

There is absolutely no way Starc is getting dropped. The only way I can see Richo starting in England is for Hazlewood

Yep, don't think form matters for Starc. He has a golden ticket.

 

[Charlie_s123]

Short memories, he went to England last time and we refused to play him for 4 Tests despite it being obvious he was suited to the conditions. Finally gave him a go when it was too late and he was our best bowler. I'm adamanant that Siddle shouldn't near the Test side in Australia and he shouldn't have played in the UAE. But in England on pitches like the one Broad ran through us for 60 he's a weapon and I'd be happy to have him at least as the reserve for those. Probably a little bit past it now so a Sayers/Richardson would be the preferred option.

Fair enough, I’ll admit I was going on his recent form which isn’t necessarily fair.

 

[Admiral Byng]

No one here (commentators are a different story) is actually pretending he's been consistent in his control though. All they're saying is that credit applies where it's due for a legitimately good short pitch ball. That is all.

And I'm sorry to say but it seems some people are currently so locked into giving it to him with both barrels that on the (admittedly rare at the moment) occasions where he gets it right, they still can't see beyond the red mist; it's just a lucky wicket or another Starc pie.

You can give him credit if you like for bowling to a plan, but I don't like the plan. He strives for express pace and sacrifices control, as a result he leaks boundaries. For any other bowler leaking boundaries is a bad thing. I'm not sold on the plan of having an express bowler who sometimes gets it right and sometimes doesn't. Not sure it is always the best thing for the team when the other bowlers rely upon building up pressure through tying the batsmen down and choking off their scoring.

 

[to1994]

Not sure about his recent form, but would think Jackson Bird would fit in well in English conditions.

He was another like Hazlewood that looked perfectly suited to them but then went over and didn't do very well. Hopefully Hazlewood has learned not to try and "do too much" like he did last time, needs to keep it simple.

 

[Wedge McManus]

Players have ups and downs. The way people carry on about him you’d think he was some sort of cricketing double agent working against Australia.

This is true. The wheel always turns. Not everyone in the playing XI is going to be in form all the time

 

[Park cricketer]

Seems like it might have been a nerve in his shoulder thankfully.

Read that he complained of tingling in his hands. Spinal nerve root compression generally causes that, hopefully he's alright. He never lost consciousness and was apparently talking to the doctor, so that's a good sign.

 

[Far Kern]

I don't think he should be a lock, but I also don't think he should be in the no way pile either.

I don't mind the suggestion of middle order for him.

Burns and Harris would have to both be a big worry against good swing bowling in England. Each plants the front foot predictably and away from the length of the ball. I would love to bowl to them.

If Warner is back, I would play Patterson as an opener in front of anyone else.

 

[Park cricketer]

Will we have two Burns opening for England and Australia at the Ashes?

The battle of the Burns!

 

[Len Nicodemo]

I wish a wild Stoin could appear. But no, we needed to give Khawaja ANOTHER go at it.

Why would we pick Stoinis?

 

[Cleavy]

Will we have two Burns opening for England and Australia at the Ashes?

The battle of the Burns!

excellent!

 

[Sproj]

All this talk of Burns not being good enough for England, well he may not be. And regardless of his 180 in this test against whatever opposition, the reality remains that he has been shafted by the selectors time and time again, yet continues to average higher than most in Shield cricket. He also has three other test centuries, STILL more than Harris, Bancroft and Renshaw (the other openers many would prefer) combined in LESS tests. He also top scored in the last SA test despite no preparation whatsoever. I mean come on, he isn't an all time great but give the bloke a chance, he's earned that!

 

[Sproj]

Burns and Harris would have to both be a big worry against good swing bowling in England. Each plants the front foot predictably and away from the length of the ball. I would love to bowl to them.

If Warner is back, I would play Patterson as an opener in front of anyone else.

So you would dump two guys who plant their front foot predictably straight for a guy who plants his front foot towards cover and shows minimal footwork at the best of times? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense and yes, I'm a Patterson fan. I'm also firmly of the belief Joe Burns should never have been dropped in the first place and especially not after he did better than any other Australian batsman in that final test of the SA debacle.

 

[Jimthegreat]

Will we have two Burns opening for England and Australia at the Ashes?

The battle of the Burns!

Good thing, we aren't playing China...lol!!!!

 

[Jimthegreat]

Why would we pick Stoinis?

The only way I'd even consider Stoinis is if we play Pattinson. Pattison is fast, brilliant but brittle.

Even then Stoinis would have to have some decent form.

 

[Far Kern]

So you would dump two guys who plant their front foot predictably straight for a guy who plants his front foot towards cover and shows minimal footwork at the best of times? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense and yes, I'm a Patterson fan. I'm also firmly of the belief Joe Burns should never have been dropped in the first place and especially not after he did better than any other Australian batsman in that final test of the SA debacle.

I don’t think either can open in England against a moving ball. I do think Burns is quality, but middle order. Patterson has already shown that he can play straight and leave the ball.

 

[Sproj]

The only way I'd even consider Stoinis is if we play Pattinson. Pattison is fast, brilliant but brittle.

Even then Stoinis would have to have some decent form.

Only need him to do a Harris and be fit for two to three months for the Ashes. I've seen a lot of bowlers live but no one has ever looked as seriously intimidating as Pattinson, except Johnson a few years ago. High praise sure but he is that good when he is fit.