Forget David Warner, Glenn Maxwell, Ashton Agar, Mitchell Starc and Matthew Wade. Australia must show faith in Jackson Bird, Nathan Lyon, Usman Khawaja, Steve Smith and Phil Hughes.
In the wake of a loss as humbling as Australia’s 347-run capitulation to England at Lords, the temptation is to overhaul the side, particularly its frail batting line-up.
However, in the absence of sound options, I would make just one forced change to the side – Lyon for Agar – while drafting in Bird for the injured Pattinson.
I should specify, this is not my ideal Australian team to tackle the Poms in the third Test – that would include Tasmania’s neat gloveman Tim Paine ahead of fumble-prone pair Brad Haddin and Matthew Wade.
But it is highly unrealistic to think the selectors will jettison vice-captain Haddin and parachute in a keeper who is not even in the Ashes squad.
Paine would undoubtedly enhance the Aussie side, which in recent times has been cruelled by Haddin’s woeful efforts keeping to the quicks and Wade’s equally inept performance to the spinners.
The 28-year-old is a tidy, uncomplicated gloveman and a far more combative batsman than the swashbuckling Haddin and Wade, having began his first-class career as an obdurate opening batsman.
Haddin, despite his sublime counterattacking innings in the first Test, has been a liability, costing Australia about 200 runs behind the stumps due to missed opportunities.
Joe Root would have been dismissed for eight instead of 180 at Lords had Haddin taken a regulation edge offered by the young Englishman early in his innings.
While Haddin does not deserve to play at Old Trafford, the pitches at that venue have been turning square this county season, which makes Wade an even greater gamble.
There have been suggestions Wade may take the field but as a batsman rather than a replacement for Haddin.
The Australian selectors have made some atrocious errors in recent times with similar stop-gap selections such as Moises Henriques and Glenn Maxwell in the Tests in India this year. But playing Wade as a batsman would supersede either of those blunders.
Considering the clumsiness of his keeping, perhaps Wade’s future at international level is as a specialist batsman.
But having never fulfilled that role at first-class level, it would be folly to conduct such an experiment at the expense of Khawaja, Smith and Hughes, who won their way into the squad purely on the back of their deeds with the blade.
The bigger threat to the positions of that trio will come from fickle former opener David Warner, who ensured he will be closely considered by the selectors after cracking a typically cavalier 193 against a strong South Africa A attack on Wednesday.
Most people have a black-and-white view on Warner. Some think he should be nowhere near the Test team, while others believe he is a match-winner and Australia’s best batsman after skipper Michael Clarke.
The latter camp is correct if such an assessment is based purely on statistics. The former camp is right if such an assessment is based solely on the traditional values of Test cricket, which demand a batsman place a high value on his wicket, and bat according to both the match situation and the needs of their side.
Warner is prodigiously gifted and has outperformed the likes of Shane Watson, Ed Cowan and Hughes since making his Test debut 19 months ago.
But he relinquished his position in the team by slugging Joe Root in a juvenile, alcohol-fuelled, late-night stoush in the lead up to Australia’s biggest Test series in years.
Handing him a reprieve immediately after his first innings of substance since would send a weak message to a side in desperate need of discipline and determination.
Hughes is manifestly the most vulnerable member of Australia’s top six because of his flawed approaches to combating both pace and spin bowling.
I have been critical of the young left hander and believe he should not even have been taken on this tour. But the only alternatives in the squad are Wade or Warner, either of whom would be unwise choices currently.
The darkhorse to steal Hughes’ spot is spinning all-rounder Glenn Maxwell, who scored a belligerent 155 not out on the first day of the match against South Africa A.
Warner is often labelled a slogger, but as a first-class player Maxwell is arguably more deserving of such slander.
The Victorian debuted in India, scoring 90 runs from four digs. More damning than his statistics were his modes of dismissal: Caught at mid on attempting to heave Ravindra Jadeja to cow corner; trapped lbw by Ravi Ashwin after playing across the line trying to whip a straight ball through square leg; caught behind attempting to manufacture a cut shot from a Jadeja delivery on the stumps; bowled after playing all around an innocuous straight ball from Jadeja.
This is not the kind of batsmanship Australia requires, given that so far this series their bowlers have been the most consistent contributors of runs.
Mitchell Starc has proven his worth with the blade but remains a less dependable operator than Tasmanian Jackson Bird.
A tall, accurate out swing bowler, Bird is the Australian quick who bears most resemblance to Kiwi paceman Tim Southee, who confounded the Poms in their Test encounters in England this year. Southee collected 12 wickets at an average of 19 in those two Tests.
The success of the Kiwi pacemen against England was built on consistency and Bird is the thriftiest Australian quick. He would be a useful foil to the more attacking pair of Ryan Harris and Peter Siddle.
That pace trio should be partnered by sturdy spinner Nathan Lyon, who was unjustly dropped for the first Test as the selectors punted on precocious teen Ashton Agar.
The 19-year-old West Australian may well become a dominant Test player. But his time will come.
There is no need to rush a greenhorn who only made his first-class debut six months ago, particularly when Australia have a canny practitioner in Lyon as an alternative.
In the 25-year-old’s last Test outing against India at Delhi, he snared nine wickets and dismissed noted players of spin Sachin Tendulkar and Virat Kohli in both innings.
Lyon is unlikely to run through England’s batting line-up in the same manner that Graeme Swann toyed with the Aussies at Lord’s.
But he offers greater control, experience and versatility than Agar, who for all his talent remains a one-dimensional tweaker.
Hutch
Guest
Drop Watson play Smith and Agar batting at 6 and 7 ... an Test batting ave of 20 in 40 plus tests doesn't warrant selection as a batsmen and if he cant make the side as a bowler alone (which he cant) drop him sooner Aus give up on the Watson experiment the better he has proven over 40 tests he doesn't have the temperament or focus to be a Test cricketer. I will put my house on the fact that if you took Smith/ Khawaja or Hughes aside and guranteed them a run of 20 tests they would dwarf Watsons contributions to date
Bearfax
Guest
There's no doubt Australia's batting has struggled in the first two tests. They are a very good side with two classy bowlers in Anderson and Swann, who we cant quite handle at this stage. But I dont think any batsman in the side has reason for being considered better than the others. Each have contributed in their small way but, the entire batting group have to lift the level of their game. I think knocking Hughes and Smith, to uplift Watson, is a bit rich when you consider both Hughes and Smith held the Australian first innings together with Agar and presented Australia almost with an opportunity for victory. Sure they have a long way to go but there have been signs with Smith, Hughes and Khawaja, that they are gradually learning the importance of valuing their wicket. I know, I know, they failed in the other innings but the fact that they showed the grit in one innings, shows they are able to counter the English attack with the right application.
Tim
Guest
davros, I'm afraid that the Poms have got every batsmen's number at the moment - including our best player, Clarke. And whilst they have Watson's number, the Poms must have Hughes and Smith on speed dial - Hughes has a top score of 81* but an aggregate score of 83 from 4 innings. And the only reason he got 81 is because the Poms put the field back to get him off strike because they thought they could attack Agar, the number 11. And as bad as Hughes has been, Smith is even worse - and he doesn't have the excuse of Swann attacking the rough outside his off stump. Bottom line is that Watson's failures this series are still better than everyone else's failures - he is the leading batsman so you can't drop him. And you can't drop him just because he's a sook - let's face it, half the elite sportsmen are complete wankers anyway. .
nickyc
Guest
England squad for Old Trafford: Cook Root Trott Pietersen Bell Bairstow Prior Bresnan Broad Swann Anderson Taylor Tremlett Panesar So Taylor in as cover for KP and Chris Tremlett and Monty Panesar in for Finn and Onions.
E
Guest
I'd just like to say to all you people who have been going on about how watson should've dropped and how terrible his batting is, well clearly you haven't looked at the leading run scorers in the ashes. At present,watson is ranked 6th out of everyone and 2nd in Australia just after agar. All everyone sees is him getting out for lbw but you all miss the fact that all our other middle order batsmen are doing much worse that he is. So with him being one of australias top run scorers and the most economical bowler in the series,he clearly cannot be dropped until others step up their performance and cause him to be ranked near the bottom.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
Were Hussey playing this series as everyone expected you'd imagine it would almost certainly be locked at 1-1 heading to Old Trafford. But in some ways losing he and Ponting at the same time has given Australia a timely wake-up call, which hopefully it will heed (this time). Invest in youth.
Bearfax
Guest
Hey James its important. Many have lost a fortune on a bad toss. Clarke is just going to have to try harder.
davros
Guest
Watson doesn't convert starts and the poms have got his number..also uses a review everytime he is fired...and sooks when he cant bat where he likes ...
James
Guest
really not one comment about how clarke is a tosser but is bad at winning tosses? come on
James
Guest
i think the bowling conditions have been about equal for both teams, australia got beautiful bowling conditions in the first innings of the first test and swann got a nice turning wicket on the 4th day of the second test. apart from those 2 both teams have bowled in almost exactly the same conditions
Bearfax
Guest
Aw. You're just saying that to keep me happy. By the way, though I agree that Silk is at least a year or two away from serious selection consideration, I noted he is not in the Australia A squad. Good inexperienced prospects like Maddison, Mitch Marsh (who is much better than his brother), Sandhu, Ahmed, Sayers etc are there. I would have thought, despite his brief first class history, that Silk had done enough to deserve selection in the 'promising' selection group. Certainly a better prospect for the future than Finch or Shaun Marsh, despite Finch's initial good tour scores, and especially given Smith, Agar and Warner are to stay with the main Australian team in Britain.
Bearfax
Guest
So would having Hayden, Gilchrist, Warne and McGath, and each are still playing a bit of cricket, but Matthew we are dreaming if we expect such a miracle to occur. But dont despair. I suspect in 10-15 years from now people like us will be ruing the retirements of players like Hughes, Khawaja, Smith and Warner. We're looking at today as if it will be like this in a year or two. I'm certain it wont.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
There are still 8 Ashes Tests left Bearfax...we are bound to disagree at some point!
Matthew Grimwood
Roar Rookie
Kattich, ponting and hussey would be great right about now...
Tim
Guest
Ok - Watson loves himself and is a big sook.. so what? Yes he wasted a DRS but since when was that grounds for dropping someone? Clarke lost us the first test with his wasted DRS on Bairstow. Since when is the solution to a crap batting performance to drop your Highest scoring batsmen? In each innings at Lords, Watson scored more runs than Rogers, Hughes, Smith and Haddin combined ! Not only has he outscored all of our specialist batsmen, he has also scored more runs than Trott, Peiterson and Cook so far this series - but nobody is calling for their heads. Our opening partnerships have actually been not too bad - averaging 42 this series - Greenidge & Haynes ave stand was 47, Hayden & Langer was 51 - so Watson is getting us off to decent start - it is the middle order that should be under the blowtorch. Watson gets a C so far thus series in my book - ordinary, but far from the worst. Good to see Warner amongst the runs, but it must be a road pitch if there are 4 batsmen a scoring 150 plus - including the "big show" himself. Has to be some risk of that form translating into swinging and spinning pitches we have seen in the test series - after all, even Watson himself was averaging 100 in the two lead-in tour games...
Bearfax
Guest
Damn it Ronan. I have to agree with you yet again. Cant you say something off centre and illogical for a change so I can challenge.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
England have the luxury of playing two spinners as Swann and Panesar together have about 400 Test wickets. Should we pick two one would either be a teenage rookie or a 31yo debutant. My argument is that you should pick your best bowlers and there is no way Agar or Ahmed are in the same class as Bird.
marty
Guest
Sorry ronan spelt your name wrong no offence mate
behind enemy lines
Guest
OK fair enough but I understood that you suggested if Australia opted for two tweakers on a spinning track then Lyon and Smith would be suffice. That seemed the only conclusion given your comment related to Sydney Kiwi proposing Lyon and Ahmed which I totally agree with. Perhaps you can clarify as I would like to hear your view on this. For instance if England wanted two spinners then they would go Panesar and Swann, not Root and Swann despite Root taking as many wickets as Smith.
Ronan O'Connell
Expert
I made no suggestion Smith should play as a bowling all-rounder. Rather that he should continue to play as a batsman and bowl some handy overs in support of Lyon and our pace attack.