It’s fairly common knowledge by now that St. Darren Lehmann and John Inverarity are firmly wedged between a rock and a hard place regarding selections for the first Ashes Test.
Right now, the only players well-and-truly inked in for Nottingham are Shane Watson, Michael Clarke, Brad Haddin and James Pattinson. The four left in the top six are up for debate, but Chris Rogers seems a relatively safe bet to open with Watto.
The depth in the fast bowling means any combination will acquit themselves well, but the presumptive incumbents in Harris and Siddle have been shaken up by Mitchell Starc’s new romance with the Duke ball.
However, the Ashes – this Ashes – only have the currency of bragging rights. Whoever has custody of the cremated bails in September should be mindful that they’re only on loan until January, after which they’ll sit in a cabinet for another three and a half years, only occasionally to be dusted off and waved at the old enemy.
It so happens that back-to-back Ashes will work to Australia’s advantage come the final showdown in the sunburnt country.
This Ashes will uncover the batsmen who can truly be relied on, the bowlers who keep their lines and lengths through thick and thin, and the patience of Lehmann to finally gel the Watson/Clarke divide.
Let’s not delude ourselves here. Lehmann, for all his positives, is not a panacea in himself. There will be losses, setbacks and controversies. No point ruling out an innings defeat or off-field handbags within the team. A major away series is the ultimate baptism of fire, as even the champions in 2005 found out.
Luckily for us antipodeans, ancient chemistry is on our side because steel is forged in fire.
After the Oval Test we will have a much better idea of who plays better under pressure, who can handle the swinging ball and who the ball should be thrown to when the chips are down. The short-term disarray will ultimately uncover pretenders and performers on the biggest stage possible.
If you’re still skeptical about how adversity brings out the best in batsmen, have a squiz at the 2006/07 whitewash of the Poms. Who made runs against a line-up of greats hellbent on vengeance? Kevin Pietersen and Alistair Cook. Who made our lives a misery for the next two series? The aforementioned.
A callow Cook in particular cemented his reputation as the consummate rock of the top order and grew to become the most prized wicket in the Test team.
Some emperors might have no clothes – but even when starkers they are emperors regardless.
This series might be written off as a lost cause to the English – but let’s find out who will stand in their way.
Silver_Sovereign
Guest
Cowan is around 30 so what you see and what you get. He wont get any better. Averages under 40 in first class cricket and has only 100 in around 20 tests. Plus he rarely turns the strike over and has an awful habit of getting out straight after his opening partner leaving Australia in trouble with the bowlers on top. I would much rather trust Watson and Rogers opening with Cowan out completely. Rogers can graft and Watson can attack. Plus his bowling and slips fielding are very handy. To me Cowan is part of the Clarke and Uncle Arthur boys club and hasn't done enough. His county season has shown his penchant for not going on after getting a start
Joshua Kayll
Roar Rookie
I wouldn't argue that 276 runs from 10 innings at 27.6 was Cook's best. He was found out constantly against McGrath and co. He has improved many times over now though. Exciting times ahead!
cuzza
Guest
How is starc the form bowler? He cleans up another tail after failing to make any semblance if a breakthrough against the only real batsmen they have. There is a very good reason Starc averages over 30 in shield cricket; he is no gods.
davos44
Guest
isn't it amazing ..if only " khawaja can score a credible 50"...we should rush him into the side...if cowan scored 50 it would never be enough ...just sayin.. also im a big fan of starc...but he does have his spells where he bowls poorly ...still only young but a potential match winner imho... he would be in my side
Tim Whelan
Roar Rookie
I agree on Lyon and Hughes (for better or worse), but Starc is IMO still a line-ball call considering the pedigree of whom he's competing with - the spearhead in Pattinson and proven consistent veterans in Siddle and Harris, the latter of whom we need as many overs from as possible before he finally hangs up his knee brace. Starc is clearly the form bowler since touching down in England though. He's certainly leapfrogged Bird in the pecking order.
Bearfax
Guest
I think you can include Hughes, Starc and Lyon as being almost assured of a first test spot. Khawaja has a guernsey if he can just score a creditable 50, and certainly if he gets a ton before the tests because its obvious he's in Boof's plan as first drop. Smith will definitely be there if they play six batsmen, which they should have, but early selection signs suggest this wont happen...hope I'm reading this wrong
Disco
Roar Guru
Yes, because Australia only struggles on 'spinning tracks', right? And actually, prior to those two Indian series, most people thought it was England who were the weaker side against spin.
Disco
Roar Guru
And what about the fact that these 10 Ashes Tests are being played firstly in English conditions (where I'd assume the home side are more comfortable than in India) and secondly down here where England won three tests by an innings last time around?
Jayden
Guest
What hes referring to Buddha is that most of us are unaware England in preparing spinning paradises as pitches. Englabd conditions are similar to aus, pace tracks I recall winning thatcseries 4-0
buddha9
Guest
no expathack they're being played in england -- the home country of the english? results against the same team in the same conditions sounds like a pretty good guide to me but hey maybe you just can't laterally
expathack
Guest
" they won in India 2-1 remember; oz lost 4-0 2 months later —- that’s a pretty good indicator how this 10 match series will go" Wasn't aware the 10 Ashes games were being played in Indian conditions?? Don't get me wrong, England are definitely the stronger team. And have the results to prove it. And will win the series. But all the fans expecting an annihilation in England, based on how a series in India went, are setting themselves up for a disappointment. You're going to end up unfairly ragging on your team if they don't win 5-0.
buddha9
Guest
some of what u say here makes sense; some of it is simply out to lunch --- of course everyone will have a clearer idea after 10 tests that's self evident. Whether that means Australia can win the ashes in Australia, I seriously doubt -- this England side are the ones tempered in steel and that's simply the result of their greater experience -- they won in India 2-1 remember; oz lost 4-0 2 months later ---- that's a pretty good indicator how this 10 match series will go -- furthermore with the benefit of a stable line-up the poms are planning well ahead something Aussies can't do because as you say, no one knows about the majority of the players, if they can cope or not -- when I mean planning i mean for example the manner in which Chris Tremlett is being slowly nursed back so he can be picked in Oz to provide the hit the deck, get bounce fast bowler -- and they're also taking Finn and trying out another of the same type, Boyd-Rankin ----- that's for one position/ one test player! --------- England have that luxury simply because they have a team in which10 of the 11 are hardened and proven performers. (which doesn't mean they're all simultaneously in form but does mean they've done it at some point in the recent past) The dropping of Compton after back to back hundreds 3 tests ago indicates the high standards they can set for themselves.. If Australia win 2 tests out of 10 in my opinion that would be a good result. English cricket is very very strong at the moment -- not only is the test team settled and experienced, there's a bagful of promising players emerging in the county game, most of whom are the equal or better than their Aussie counter-parts -- sorry but that's the truth.