Ashes 2019
- Thread starter RugbyReg
- Start date
The Guardian seems to think so: https://www.theguardian.com/comment...triumph-of-a-sporting-hero-with-a-little-luck
Up the Guts
Steve Williams (59)
Thought: our Pommy friends won both the CWC and the Third Test because of umpiring errors at the death.
As I said earlier in the thread, Stokes is a jammy bloody player (nevertheless, amazing under pressure).
Wilson has had 12 decisions overturned this series. Part of the problem is that 7/12 umpires on the ICC elite panel are from Australia or England and because umpires have to be neutral we've been stuck with the crappy ones. Wilson is due to be rotated out of the Ashes series but the guy they've got coming in isn't even on the elite panel. Might be time to review the neutral law.
Up the Guts
Steve Williams (59)
I might be wrong but I was thinking about this some more and, though the loss was terrible, this isn't anything like the trauma post Cape Town. If any players are able to put the game in perspective it should be Smith, Warner, and Bancroft.
I think the ICC needs to revisit this.
I think teams would prefer to do away with neutral umpires in circumstances where it means getting a significantly better umpire.
Finsbury Girl
Trevor Allan (34)
How anyone could give NOT OUT to the Lyon LBW is astonishing. It's hard to get more plumb.
John S
Chilla Wilson (44)
Must have been going under the stumps
Spruce Moose
Fred Wood (13)
Totally agree, if the best two umpires are an Englishman and Australian then they should be chosen with a neutral match referee to keep an eye on any obvious bias. The next group of umpires for the last two tests includes one who has only umpired 3 test matches, how can he be expected to handle the pressure?
Brumby Runner
David Wilson (68)
That's definitely the way I'd go. Harris is still better than Bancroft against the quicks, and remember, Anderson will probably be back for the fourth test. Harris' problems start with the spinners turning the ball back into him. Something a good and effective coach would have sorted out long before this.
Khawaja is out of sorts but if he has one good day he will score plenty. Despite his century earlier, Wade is not a specialist test batsman and is the one to go.
Starc will need to bowl "a thousand" deliveries in the game coming up to get a bit of match fitness, but he then will replace Patto who put in a pretty ordinary bowling performance in test 3.
I think Wade has shown enough to justify staying around. He's scored a third innings tonne, he made a valuable contribution in an ill-fated effort at Headingley, and he's been oddly capable in the field for a keeper. Khawaja has failed to get runs over and over again, and has looked lazy and distracted in the field all summer.
Even if none of this were true, the fact remains that we are in desperate need of a solid, reliable innings-builder at number 3, because our opening stands so far have been 2, 13, 11, 13, 12, and 10. The last thing we should be doing is moving Smith from his favoured position (just ask Joe Root) so Khawaja simply has to make way for Menedict Lamberbatch.
I would also bring in Starc for Pattinson.
Even if none of this were true, the fact remains that we are in desperate need of a solid, reliable innings-builder at number 3, because our opening stands so far have been 2, 13, 11, 13, 12, and 10. The last thing we should be doing is moving Smith from his favoured position (just ask Joe Root) so Khawaja simply has to make way for Menedict Lamberbatch.
I would also bring in Starc for Pattinson.
Spruce Moose
Fred Wood (13)
Khawaja averages 40 in tests and we don't have many guys doing that! So think he deserves one more chance and being told that he is playing for his spot. Then he would open with Warner and Lasagne at 3. Wade deserves his spot, he has been our best domestic player for past 12 months and been unlucky so far this series.
I don't think you can drop Harris after one match, that's just jokeshop stuff. If he was worth giving a chance, he's worth giving a bare minimum of three matches. Personally I'd have picked Burns from the very beginning, but now Harris has been selected, he's a lock for the rest of the series, you can't treat batsmen like that, let alone openers.
Spruce Moose
Fred Wood (13)
Its harsh but its Harris vs. Khawaja and I think the fact Harris has a weakness against Leach then perhaps its best to stick with a guy with proven record.
Agree that Burns should have been opening (not really sure how Bancroft made the squad with his technique) but think his illness just came at the worst time.
Agree that Burns should have been opening (not really sure how Bancroft made the squad with his technique) but think his illness just came at the worst time.
But likewise, we have to drop a player this match because our best bat is coming back in and the player who was brought in to fill his spot also can't be dropped because he was the best bat in the test Smith missed.
In regular circumstances Labuschagne would drop out again because the spot he was filling is no longer available. Clearly that isn't going to and shouldn't happen.
I don't see why Harris deserves to remain more than anyone else. It would absolutely be rough to drop him after one test but likewise it would be to drop Khawaja or Wade just because you felt like you didn't want to be harsh on Harris.
I really don't know which way they'll go.
Up the Guts
Steve Williams (59)
They could open with Usman and bat Marnus at 3 (he’s batted in tests there before). Nearly all the top sides at the moment are struggling with middle order and openers. England, Australia, India, and NZ all have two world class batsmen (although it would be good if Warner started batting like one again) and are having problems with the rest of the side.
Warner is only world class at home and in South Africa in test cricket.
He averages 30 in England and has never scored a century.
Up the Guts
Steve Williams (59)
True but in terms of openers going around at the moment I’d still say he is world class. Maybe Markram would have him but the other top teams are struggling at the top.
No doubt he's one of the best in world cricket. Lots of the best have also been amazing at home and not great overseas *cough* Virender Sehwah.
I just think that expecting him to make big runs in England is hopeful more than a reasonable expectation. Of course it might happen and he played an excellent innings in the first innings of the last test but I don't think we can rely on him to make lots of runs. He's played 11 tests in England and never made a century and averages 30. That's a pretty sizeable sample.
Finsbury Girl
Trevor Allan (34)
Joe Burns averages 40.
Wade has failed under pressure all series. Scored a ton when under zero pressure. I'm with Junior, he should go.