Good team, but I'd think about playing Amjad Khan instead of Stuart Broad.
5th Test: England vs Australia at the Brit Oval
- Thread starter evertonfan
- Start date
Good team, but I'd think about playing Amjad Khan instead of Stuart Broad.
MasterBlaster76
ICC Chairman
Broad got six wickets and scored sixty - what more does he have to do ffs?
Lets hope he is fit for the final test, this decider then will be his last test,and if he plays in the last match definitely he will be charged up, it will be a very good test to watch..
woodzy
Club Cricketer
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2004
- Online Cricket Games Owned
-
Ok this would be my team for the 5th Test if I were England.
Strauss
Cook
Key
Ramprakash
Collingwood
Prior
Flintoff
Broad
Swann
Panesar/Sidebottom
Onions
Alot of people will raise their eyebrows at a few of my selections. I think Mark Ramprakash has to play. I know hes turning 40 but I really dont see how that matters in this context. Hes scoring runs and is among the top two leading run scorers in county cricket this season. He is a far more confident and positive player to the one that last played test cricket seven years ago. I think that he deserves another chance given his Bradmanesque averages in county cricket over the last few seasons.
As for Robert Key, I think hes a far more accomplished no. 3 than Ravi Bopara. The commentators were calling for his inclusion and Id have to agree with them. If not him then what about James Hildreth anyone? The only other change id make would be to play Panesar as a second spinner. From an Australian point of view, Id say that we have been much more comfortable playing the quicks in recent times. Off-spinners have really troubled quite a few Australian batsmen over the last 12 months. Just look at what Paul Harris of South Africa has done. The Oval is a wicket which is very reminiscent of Australian wickets, so I dont think it will be of much assistance to England's swing bowlers, therefore id probably leave Anderson, besides hes probably injured anyway.
Strauss
Cook
Key
Ramprakash
Collingwood
Prior
Flintoff
Broad
Swann
Panesar/Sidebottom
Onions
Alot of people will raise their eyebrows at a few of my selections. I think Mark Ramprakash has to play. I know hes turning 40 but I really dont see how that matters in this context. Hes scoring runs and is among the top two leading run scorers in county cricket this season. He is a far more confident and positive player to the one that last played test cricket seven years ago. I think that he deserves another chance given his Bradmanesque averages in county cricket over the last few seasons.
As for Robert Key, I think hes a far more accomplished no. 3 than Ravi Bopara. The commentators were calling for his inclusion and Id have to agree with them. If not him then what about James Hildreth anyone? The only other change id make would be to play Panesar as a second spinner. From an Australian point of view, Id say that we have been much more comfortable playing the quicks in recent times. Off-spinners have really troubled quite a few Australian batsmen over the last 12 months. Just look at what Paul Harris of South Africa has done. The Oval is a wicket which is very reminiscent of Australian wickets, so I dont think it will be of much assistance to England's swing bowlers, therefore id probably leave Anderson, besides hes probably injured anyway.
MasterBlaster76
ICC Chairman
If Flintoff is fit, given that this will be his last ever Test, I expect him to play a blinder, just like his last ever Lord's Test; if he does, we'll win.
MasterBlaster76
ICC Chairman
And if the damn stupid bloody weather leaves the match alone.
MasterBlaster76 added 1 Minutes and 38 Seconds later...
Mahmood? I never rated him in Tests. Also, I think Prior has done really well: his keeping is much improved (stick that in your pipe, Mr Langer) and his batting is very useful down the order.
MasterBlaster76 added 1 Minutes and 38 Seconds later...
Mahmood? I never rated him in Tests. Also, I think Prior has done really well: his keeping is much improved (stick that in your pipe, Mr Langer) and his batting is very useful down the order.
I think the massive difference is between 'getting' six wickets, and 'taking' six wickets. 3 of them weren't exactly good balls, I will give him the other three especially the one to Siddle. So really he only took 3 wickets and scored sixty.
Therbs
PCPL Season 2: Best Bowler (Division 2)
I reckon that's getting pretty close to what England will do. It would be funny to see Ramprakash back in (instead of Key).
Australia will be:
1. Katich
2. Watson
3. Ponting
4. Hussey
5. Clark
6. North
7. Haddin
8. Johnson
9. Hauritz / Clarke
10. Siddle
11. Hilfenhaus
12. Lee
Australia FTW
I remember a post a while back during the warm-up games where someone said 'The next thing you know they'll be wanting Moore in the team just because he scored a 100 in the warmup!' 
Ramps was the Bell of his era, wasn't he? Imagine a decade for now we're calling for Bell's inclusion because he's dominating at County Level and we have a must win match in the Ashes...
Ramps was the Bell of his era, wasn't he? Imagine a decade for now we're calling for Bell's inclusion because he's dominating at County Level and we have a must win match in the Ashes...
So Clark hit's a quick 30 and he gets promoted to five
@Zorax. Yeah he was the Bell of his generation, averaged something like 27 in test cricket.
I wouldn't "reprieve" Broad, half his series wickets came in the aussie 1st innings in the 4th Test once the game was all but over - the aussies were 393/6 when he took MJ's wicket, 292 runs ahead. And then he made an unpressured 61, we need players who can do that when we need it, not once the game is all over bar the shouting. Where was the 61 when we needed it 1st innings? Nowhere. A rather tame shot and out for a less than convincing 3 runs.
ASHES 2009
Strauss : 344 runs @ 49.14.
Been strong leading from the front, the only England batsman to make 100 and scored DOUBLE the next highest score in his 161. His captaincy has been in doubt, but frankly I think a lot of it is unjust. His only two defeats as captain have been when England collapsed for 51 in the carribean and again when England could only must 102 here, so not a lot his captaincy could have done about either. Maybe he shouldn't have batted, but let's face it, England should still have made more than 102 runs, even 190+ would have put us in the game.
Cook : 203 runs @ 29.00
Just the one score over 30, without his 95 he is averaging just 18.00 in six innings. He did offer some resistance in the 4th Test, fair enough, but 30s aren't good enough to make him exempt from criticism. Maybe had he scored 60 1st innings instead of 30 and 30 I could make a case for him.
Bopara : 105 runs @ 17.50
Not even convincing runs, his HS of 35 could have been a lot less and perhaps had it been we'd have seen him gone already. He should never have been thrown in the deep end at no 3 against the aussies, and he is one of 2-5 players who should have gone before the 4th Test and maybe then we'd not have fallen apart - that's not even hindsight.
Bell : 64 runs @ 21.33
Good fifty on his recall, a match to forget like the rest at Headingley. The only two reasons I wouldn't drop him are that he's only had a couple of chances so chopping and changing wouldn't help and he is experienced which anyone coming in won't be
Collingwood : 225 runs @ 32.14
Hard to believe he has the most fifties of any England batsman this series, but he needs to dig in and produce more runs when needed like he did at Cardiff.
Prior : 239 runs @ 39.83
Perhaps silencing the critics for now, averaging well with bat and not too much wrong with his keeping. Unfortunately his good form with bat led to England's folly in playing five bowlers without Flintoff in the side, especially with Cook, Bopara and Bell looking vulnerable above and a long looking tail.
Broad : 168 runs @ 28.00 & 12 wkts @ 36.33
OK with the bat, but half his wickets have come in a lost cause situation and his HS also came when the game was all but up. You could make a case for his retention, but only if you ignore his lack of form in 3/4 of the series so far and disregard the circumstances of his 6/91 and 61.
Swann : 168 runs @ 33.60 & 6 wkts @ 68.17
Combatitive with the bat, mostly ineffectual with the ball. 2/3 of his wickets came in his 4/87, unfortunately England have too many underperformers with the ball in the series and that's why the aussies have had one strong innings per Test - even in defeat they reached 400.
Anderson : 84 runs @ 16.80 & 12 wkts @ 38.92
Arguably our best bowler, but not quite dominating the aussies as some of the 2005 bowling attack did. Another bowler whose BB makes up near half or more of his wickets. Good fight from him with the bat, but I'd swap those runs for the extra 4-5 wickets he should be taking with his ability
Harmison : 19 runs @ 19.00 & 2 wkts @ 49.00
Many wanted him recalled for his bounce, pace and aggression. Well 2/98 was hardly worth the baited breath, in fact his recall was just a waste of time. I do wonder if he played for the aussies if he'd even bowl England out, not the match-winner many make him out to be and his best days are probably behnid him in the past where perhaps he should be left
Onions : 19 runs @ 9.50 & 10 wkts @ 30.30
Irony is a funny thing, more wanted Harmison recalled than Onions included/retained and yet Onions has done better than supposed better bowlers. He's taken the most wickets per Test of England's bowlers and his figures reflect his relatively constant threat.
Hardly any of the above have strong cases for retention, however I think a maximum of four changes should suffice. I would have dropped Bopara and brought in two batsmen with the second coming in in place of Flintoff instead of Harmison. But now we face two choices, make a few changes that arguably should have been made last Test, or risk the same names doing better than they have in the WHOLE SERIES. It's not that Bopara et al had a bad game, they've had a poor series. And as mentioned TWICE, Broad's efforts when the game was lost are admirable but are we to expect repeats only when the game is lost? We want match-winning 5wis, not those taken when the opposition have piled on the runs, misery and are over halfway to victory. Where was the 6/91 when we needed it at Edgbaston?
BROAD BY TEST
1st : 19 & 14 + 1/129 = DRAWN
2nd : 16 & DNB + 2/78 & 1/49 = WON
3rd : 55 + 0/51 & 2/38 = DRAWN
4th : 3 & 61 + 6/91 = LOST
Some useful contributions, but his main contributions have been when the game is lost or not enough to turn a drawn into a win
^Agree on Broad. He's been at his best when there has been no pressure.
But I'd be glad as an Aussie fan to see England make a lot of changes for the Oval. I love watching the fans and selectors squirm about how many players should be dropped
If it were me selecting for England, there'd only be 2 changes. Any more changes and you start inciting panic:
1. Flintoff in, either Harmison/Broad out. I'd leave Broad out, but his numbers from last match will convince England to keep him. I think the Aussies would much rather face Broad than Harmison.
2. And either Bell or Bopara should go, probably Bell. Move Bopara down to #5 where he can play more freely, and pick Trott probably at #3, Colly at #4. Rob Key has an argument as he can play at #3 better than Trott/Colly and if they can convince Marcus Trescothick to play 1 match that would be even better.
But I'd be glad as an Aussie fan to see England make a lot of changes for the Oval. I love watching the fans and selectors squirm about how many players should be dropped
If it were me selecting for England, there'd only be 2 changes. Any more changes and you start inciting panic:
1. Flintoff in, either Harmison/Broad out. I'd leave Broad out, but his numbers from last match will convince England to keep him. I think the Aussies would much rather face Broad than Harmison.
2. And either Bell or Bopara should go, probably Bell. Move Bopara down to #5 where he can play more freely, and pick Trott probably at #3, Colly at #4. Rob Key has an argument as he can play at #3 better than Trott/Colly and if they can convince Marcus Trescothick to play 1 match that would be even better.
Last edited:
Similar threads
