Mickey Arthur wants you to stop bagging the rotation policy guys. Because the Aussie team and management knows exactly how who is in their best team.
Furthermore, rotation and injury prevention has been about managing players in an effort to put them on the park as much as possible.
“We’re very clear on who the best team is and who the best attack is,” Arthur told reporters.
The only problem with that is that no one else seems to know, and the six Test matches played over the summer only served to muddy the waters.
I’ll admit, many armchair critics like myself have no idea what’s actually happening inside the Aussie camp. We don’t know how injured those guys are and what the best course of action is to help them.
But to suggest they know what their best attack is does bemuse me a little.
It is patently unclear to me, and I think I’m taking more than a few of you with me, who the top three quicks in the country are at the moment.
I reckon, with all permutations and combinations considered, I could list at least five different lineups that could potentially be our ‘best.’
Whether injury, sports science, good or bad tactics or anything else is the reason for this is beside the point.
The point is that our best attack is rather ambiguous to most people outside the Australian setup.
I could tell you right now who’s going to be in the English attack when our boys arrive at Trent Bridge.
We can safely assume that James Anderson, Stuart Broad and Graeme Swann will be there, and these three will almost definitely play in all five games.
The other spot is likely to be taken by Tim Bresnan or Steve Finn.
Easy.
For the Aussies, we know Siddle and Lyon will be on the team sheet on the first day.
And that’s all we can safely assume for now.
Will it be Bird? Or Johnson? Or Hilfenhaus? Maybe Ryan Harris? What if James Pattinson recovers from injury? Or the young gun Cummins? That’s not even mentioning Mitchell Starc…
Basically, I have no idea.
We don’t even know how many games either of our two certainties will play, with the Aussie selectors loving a shakeup as much as the Cat Empire love a shakedown.
The constant changes to our side this summer has inevitably led to a situation where we’ve had less Test match exposure for more candidates.
And while we should celebrate the fact that we got to see Jackson Bird and a rejuvenated Mitchell Johnson in action, we should almost certainly lament the fact that we didn’t have our best attack available to us for that crunch fixture against South Africa.
We were one game away from being number one in the world, and we rested our supposed number one bowler, Peter Siddle.
Successful teams don’t hold their aces in their hand when all the chips are on the table.
There’s no doubt we’ll be playing our best side in the Ashes, but surely it’s folly to hold players back when we’re facing the number one side in the world, at home, with the top ranking on the line.
Can anyone say that fielding a completely new lineup of quickies that day didn’t profoundly impact our chances of winning that game?
Whether it’s relevant anymore or no, but the great Aussie Test teams of the past were as resistant to change as Tony Abbot’s opinion on the Carbon tax.
You couldn’t have rested Glenn McGrath. You just couldn’t have.
He would have told you to shove it and walked out onto the pitch even if his name wasn’t on the team sheet.
If he thought he was fit to play, he was playing.
The English side have a McGrath-esque situation, with Broad, Anderson and Swann rarely missing a game in the whites.
South Africa are the same. Dale Steyn, Vernon Philander and Morne Morkel always play when they’re fit.
I know we’ve had some bad luck with injuries. I know guys carry niggles.
I also have no clue who our best three quickies are, and when they’ll be fit.
I don’t know whether our spinner is capable of bowling out good batting lineups on wearing tracks.
I don’t know whether Ryan Harris, James Pattinson or Pat Cummins will make it through a Test match, let alone a five match series.
I know that they’re all quality players, and I have no doubts about their talent and skill.
I just don’t know how to combine all our fast bowlers, about six of whom have proved they are major assets to the team on their day, into a match winning lineup for English conditions.
And I’ll be surprised if anyone knows that right now.
Follow Paddy on Twitter @WarmingthePine
Dadiggle
Guest
The best 3 quicks depend on who is playing on what pitch. As some of them are seam bowlers and some are more swing bowlers cough cough Starc
Professor Farnsworth
Guest
Siddle Pattinson Bird That is a quality combination but Pattinson should not be playing consecutive tests as is injury-proned. Patrick Cummins, Mitchell Johnson, Mitchell Starc should be in the squad for the Ashes, Ryan Harris & Ben Hilfenhaus' international careers could be well over due to the presence of other bowlers. Ben Cutting and Josh Hazlewood should be in the One day squads.
AndyMack
Guest
Would rather pick some "potential century makers" in the top 6, but that doesnt seem to be an option for some reason.
AndyMack
Guest
Bird in England has the goods i think. His action should suit. Him and Pattinson should lead our attack for sure.
AndyMack
Guest
pattos' length in england will cause issues. i think he needs to be fit and firing for us to have a serious chance of taking the ashes back.
AndyMack
Guest
Agree on Finn. Think he will be #1 in world as fast bowler pretty soon. Such a talent and still very young. Broad is very very good in England, and average overseas, so he is a big danger in the england ashes series.
AndyMack
Guest
is that you Sheek...???? Agree in principle, but the above comment from "invers" was a bit funny......
AndyMack
Guest
voice of reason. not a voice our NSP are tuned to listen to....
Train Without A Station
Guest
I'd say he is our fourth best providing Bird can maintain his start to his test career. Him and Starc are basically the same. They seem to bowl similar, go for the same runs and have the same flaws. Considering that I think Johnson's batting puts him ahead. Only because he is being compared to a player equal in his primary role though. Pattinson and Johnson certainly gives a deep batting line up. Potential century makers down to 9 if we've only played 4 bowlers.
Patrick Effeney
Editor
Agreed Cameron, I must say he's been the best in my mind whenever he's been on the paddock. I love the fact that he seems to just hate batsmen and takes a singular pleasure in hurting or dismissing them. His injury does throw a spanner in the works, though, surely?
Timmuh
Roar Guru
How hell does anyone have Johnson in their best three? He bowled short in Perth and got some lucky wickets - and maybe two deserved ones - with the bounce. He bowled short in Melbourne to a bunch of players who don't play well on Australian type pitches, and were facing their first true Australian style pitch on their tour. That sort of stuff doesn't work except in Perth, or against sub-continental players on some other Australian pitches. Every time he thought about anything other than a half tracker he looked about as dangerous as Hastings - straighter than old-school Mitch, but still rubbish.
Daniel Szabo
Roar Guru
Siddle, Pattinson and Johnson. I'm not sold on Bird yet. England at Lords is a completely different kettle of fish to the "mighty" Sri Lankan top order at the MCG. I'm not saying Bird isn't up to it. He may well be up to it after the tour of India. But if the Ashes were being played tomorrow there's no way I'd pick Bird (in the first XI that is). I'd bring Bird, Starc and Hilf as back up.
Rob from Brumby Country
Guest
I would take a bowling complement of the following: Right Armers - Siddle, Pattinson, Hilfenhaus, Bird Left Armers - Starc, Johnson Spinners - Lyon, Beer For the first Test, I would be selecting Siddle, Pattinson, Hilfenhaus and Lyon. If they can't take 20 wickets, then you make changes. But I'd be pretty confident that they'd have the goods.
Jammel
Guest
For mine, it is Pattinson Bird Siddle on that order. Think we will take three others to England - i'd go for Johnson Starc and Hilfenhaus atm.
Pope Paul VII
Guest
This is true Disco.
Disco
Roar Guru
I feel a bit the same way.Like Siddle he's mostly about aggression and attitude. Then again, there seems to be a view that this is what's most important. Neither of them, though, are a patch on Anderson in terms of bowling skill.
Disco
Roar Guru
You'd think so, unless Broad can rediscover his batting form.
Pope Paul VII
Guest
I'm not sold on Patto yet. Fiesty and agressive he may be but NZ and India were pox. He pulled up short against WI so who knows how he would have gone. Whilst firey against SA he left them bemused rather than belittled. Similarly hard headed pros like Cook, Trott, Pietersen, Bell aren't likely to be spooked. On the other hand I've nominated Bird on the evidence of ordinary SL. Just appears to move the ball and bowl a good line at a reasonable clip. And much maligned Johnners the finger breaker. 140 plus bowls armpit line to righties. No one likes that. Despite the debacle at Perth he was easily the most menacing. Still I'm prepared to be proven wrong, early days for young Patto. Maybe he's copied his brother's agression. Went to the BBL and Dazza had steam coming out his ears! Mad as a cut snake.
Steele
Guest
Loved the cat empire reference!! It's gotta be siddle, Patto and bird followed by Harris, cutting and cummins.The Mitch"s are expensive and hilfys just pedestrian. Cummins gets in on potential as he is a special talent and the future leader. This won't happen of course as the selectors don't consider form or past performances relevant.
Pope Paul VII
Guest
Finn way ahead of Broad and Bresnan.