Australian Ashes squad: a Pom’s eye view

Rogers has to play and probably has to open due to his technique and form over there (he just scored 214 for middlesex). We need good starts. Khawaja also has to play, I agree about Hughes, Warner Watson but I'd throw Cowan into that category and reckon 1 or 2 of the quartet have to miss out (will probably come down to early tour form). It is difficult to work out what to do with 5 openers in the squad. With the number of openers there, there are endless permutations. Watson has been better as an opener so perhaps he and Rogers can form a partnership. If Clarke bats 4 Khawaja 5 you would need Hughes or Warner to bat 3-6 unless you play haddin at 6 and Faulkner 7. Wade is the worst keeper I've ever seen at test level for Australia and has eyesight or hand eye co-ordination problems and has difficulty gloving the ball in regulation. He can play as a batsmen if you can find somewhere to put him in the field. Bird has to be in the side, he has height and great control can swing reverse swing and seam the ball. He's in my XI. If Starc played and batted 7 you could accomodate 4 quicks (3 of whom are more than handy with the willow) and Lyon. Interesting to see how they perform in the leadup matches. Interestingly Ponting is playing for Surrey in June July I believe and could be available for a callup if in form and the tour batsmen are faultering.

I think Test batsmen who can win a match are rare --I think instantly of Doug Walters and Adam Gilchrist but Michael Clarke probably is also in this category. All three could be attacking but could also dig in and play long innings under difficult circumstances and against world-class bowlers. I am yet to be convinced that our attacking trio of Hughes, Warner and Watson can do this. India strengthened my opinion. When those guys had to bat for a day to save a Test, they were often out to a one-day shot. I hope they prove me wrong in England but until they do, I think we can not afford to have all three of them in the batting line-up.

If he's the best option, why does the timing of hois debut make a difference? Play the best team to win every Test. And its not like he's an untried 17 year old, he has pplenty of first class experience behind him. Anyone who plays makes a debut, just play the best available option to beat the opponent in the conditions.

I think Hughes has to be in the side - he is the only player capable of scoring big hundreds regularly - match changing / winning scores... he has been doing it in all forms of cricket all his life. I always think that is important and thus I think its imperative to give him time. If he has a great series (which i think he will) that will be a huge boost for Australia for many years With the others - Warner is very inconsistent and I cant see him being a reliable test opener - bat him at 5 or 6. Cowan is solid but not a match winner, and Watson should be a number 6 allrounder and If he fails to find his mojo in the first few test, bring in Kawaja.

"Why does no one think anything of Bird?" I don't think that having him behind Siddle, Harris and Pattinson is necessarily "not thinking anything of him". And some want the left-armer, presumably for the sake of having a left-armer. If people didn't think anything of him, we would be saying he should not be on the tour. Everyone seems fine with him being in the squad, but don't quite put him in the first choice eleven.

The team should be 1. Cowan 2. Warner 3. Rogers 4. Clarke 5. Khawaja 6. Wade 7. Hartley/ Starc/ Faulkner 8. Siddle 9. Pattinson 10. Lyon 11. Bird

Why does no one think anything of Bird? He's an outstanding player and will probably dominate in England. Anyway, Watson wont open. When we have Rogers, Warner and Cowan to mix about it's just not going to happen. People throw out these wild ideas like Watson wont play, Paine/Hartley being keeper and not playing a spinner. Again, just not going to happen. Here's the reality for the Test at Trent Bridge: Warner - Seems him and Cowan have the best thing to it as far as opening partnership goes Cowan Hughes Rogers - He'll get first shot ahead of Khawaja Clarke - He's a number 5 and always will be. Watson - Only possibility is that he switches around with Rogers, unlikely though. Haddin - Paine is finished, can't bat and Injury prone. Wade is our only back up in CA and will be for atleast 2 more years, you know, til he becomes the first choice when Hads retires. Siddle - Love Sids but Harris probably deserves first Test. Unlikely though, Siddles consistant and experience against the English. Pattinson - Best bowler in Australia Lyon - Our only choice for spin, will play all 5 Bird - That lil' bit of swing and good line and length is all we need Others: Starc - Like him as a short form but he's a carbon copy of MJ just 10 or so years younger. Too erratic and Patto's a preferable strike bowler. Rotation policy means he'll get a go but unless he's doing deadly in-swinging yorkers he may only have one appearance come July. Khawaja - Wont play first Test. Considering our batting depth at the moment someones bound to fail and very badly at that, so he'll get ago. Wouldn't rule out Smith though, he's a couple Aus A games away from being the 17th member. Wade - Haddin's an experienced and probably fair to say decent Ashes batsmen/wicketkeeper. Tough for him to get a gig. Harris - He'll play, not sure what else to say. Injury always a concern though. As left field as this is I could see Silk coming into contention. He's a shockingly slow batsmen but he gets the runs. Could be what we need.

You only have to watch the ODI at old trafford when Australia were last in the UK and watch Warner batting. He was all at sea against Finn and Anderson swinging the ball. He looked clueless. He will be exposed for sure this Ashes. Cowan Rodgers Hughes Kwawja Clarke Watson - if bowling otherwise Warner gets a chance at 6

Nikhilv. Exactly right man. Taking the shine off the ball and seeing it off is vital in Pommy land or anywhere in the world for that matter. With Warner and watson you don't get that. But we all Know Warner is protected species and will get the gig and Watson aswell. For Aus cricket to move 4ward tough calls need to be made. Those 2 I just mentioned.

Basically, Warner had obviously given "special treatment" to the selectors to be picked automatically. Warner may get a 100 off 60 balls but is that any good if its every 10-15 innings? Mr. 30 Cowan least hangs around with Clarke etc to get runs, Warner's 30 wil be off 15 balls. With no partnership. Not hard crickets about partnerships and Cowan provides this NOT Warner!!

Rogers and Cowan fighting for 1 position with Cowan to get it

Better than what we usually are 100/5 with Clarke on 70.

You have Cowan and Rogers opening I see. With those 2 I think there is a good chance we will be no wickets down at lunch. Problem is we will only be 20

Hartley is probably the best, but he has not been tried at test level and now is not the time to try to debut another player.

Hartley is the best gloveman playing Shoield cricket, and I'll take glovework over batting just about every time. I would have taken Hartley and Paine as the keepers. As for the ieda of Wade giving up the gloves and being a specialist batsman, I would not be against that. He could be a decent batsman, too much looks like it needs fixing for him to ever be a good keeper. He was better in India than in Australia, but still bad.

Paine hasn't been in great batting form though. That's where Wade stands out for me.

Doolan not a bad option. Would have Lyon in for Siddle, and if it's seaming around alot i'd have Bird in for Siddle. On a seaming track Bird will be impossible to play.

I would have Bird in for Siddle. Siddle at times can bowl dollies, and Bird's first class average is 19, that would challenge for best in the world.

Only thing is Wade is probably our 2nd best bat. Sound stupid but it might be worth turning into a specialist batsman look what it did to Sangakara. I know you can't compare Wade to probably the best Sri-Lankan bat ever, but it might just do the job for him. His keeping is all but useless.

Yes. Yes, he is. Far worse. Zoehrer was competent, nothing special but competent.