Reports suggesting that Hazlewood is coming in for Pattinson and that will be the only change for tonight.
The way I see it is that Hazelwood and Siddle are more like for like in that they tie one end up while the strike bowlers attack the other. Pattinson is one of the attack bowlers, so if he's to be rested then I would have thought Mitch Starc would have come in.
My own preference would have been to bring both Hazelwood and Starc into the Lords test. It just seems to take a lot of sting out of the attack if we have both Siddle and Hazelwood in the team.
Listening to Crash on The Back Page last night, he seemed to think that Hazelwood was going to get the nod. He suggested the plan was going to be to strangle the Poms and force them to take risks.
Wasn't sure about electing to bowl first, but so far so good.
I think the approach to this test has been a little on the negative side. From picking both Hazelwood and Siddle to keep it tight and make scoring difficult to sending the Poms in, it looks to me that Langer/Paine are keeping an option to hang out for a draw on the last day very much to the forefront.
Supposed to be a “like for like” replacement. So, as much as I’d like Starc to have a go at them, it’d be Labuschagne who would come in.If Smith is concussed, which he has to be right? Can we bring in a new batsman in under the new guidelines?
Could that player be Mitchell Starc?