We go to Lords for the second test starting 14 August. Back the same team or make changes. England will be forced into at least one change with Jimmy Anderson ruled out but could see them making up to 4 changes. 

Never ever change a winning team unless injuries force you to. The only failures were the openers but I would give another opportunity. I would hate for the selectors to make a change and we lose, we've been doing too much of that lately.

The performances of Smith and Lyon were 10/10
Head and Cummins were 8/10
Wade, Pattinson and Siddle with both bat and ball were 7/10
Khawaja and Paine were 5/10
Bancroft and Warner were 2/10, easily covered by the good performances of the others

For England
Burns, Broad, Woakes and Stokes 8/10
Root 7/10
Roy and Denly 5/10
Bairstow 4/10
Butler and Ali 2/10
Anderson DNF
So Ali won't be dropped, Denly 50/50, Buttler gone, Anderson out, without Anderson Australia's batsmen got on top of England, so him being out really hurts England.

I'd go the same team although I'd consider alternating patterson/starc from match to match

Go the same team, go 2 nil up, for the 3rd test, rest Cummins, Pattinson, bring in Hazlewood, Neser, Siddle, bore the hell out of them, bowling wide of off scoring 2 runs per over, it'll take them 2 days to score 400, we don't have to get them out.... draw the test retain the Ashes. Release Starc Pattinson, Cummins against tiring England players to take the series 4-0 in the final 2 tests. I'd like to see that.

Gday MR,
jaszyjim - We should not loose sight that England was 1 bowler down for basically the whole test.
How much difference would this had made to the result & should this be factored in for the 2nd test.
If we had lost 1 of our 3 pace men at an early stage, it would be curtains with our current tine up.
Do we drop Bancroft, promote below up 1 place & bring in Labuschagne or M. Marsh?
to bat at 6?

Exactly my thoughts, JJ.

Left armers have a great record at Lords which makes me tempted to play Starc over Pattinson for this test. 

I cant see any reason to bring in Marsh or Labuschagne. Firstly because I dont believe in dropping a player after one poor game and rewriting the order. Secondly the batting is too weak as it to weaken it with an allrounder.

A major problem for England with Anderson going down is that Ali couldnt keep it tight. If you go a bowler down you ideally want a spinner holding up an end. Lyon can do that and attack as well allowing two fit seamers to rotate at the other end and then a few overs from Head and Smith where needed. Ali went at over four meaning that they had to bowl so many overs with Root and Denly (who both did well Denly was especially unlucky not to get a wicket). Additionally Siddle is known as a high stamina bowler capable of bowling a consistent line and length over lots of overs. 

What type of pitch do the well informed members of the Cricket Forum think the Poms will prepare to give them the bedt chance of a win or draw???...

Well they coc ked up preparing the right kind of pitch for the W Cup final at Lord’s so I’m not holding my breath.

Olly Stone has hurt his back again so that’s Jimmy, Olly & Woody out and we’re only up to Test number two.
Leach has to come in for Moeen, Smith has a much worse record against good left arm spin.

Good to  see you posting, Dman.

I was going to  welcome you to the cricket forum, but you've  already accrued 2 300  posts elsewhere on Inside Sport.

To answer your question, they don't want to serve up spin friendly wickets, because of the potent Lyon. Having said this, both Denly and Smith also extracted prodigious turn at Edgbaston, as well as Lyon.

The Edgbaston victory has to be put in context. Anderson bowled only 4 overs, taking 2 wickets (I think), before  he was injured. It would have been very difficult for Australia to have won at Edgbaston if he had stayed fit.

A new face on here. hello. 

Former England test skippers Nasser Hussain and Michael Vaughan have both called for a deck with some grass to provide seam and swing for their bowlers. They reckon the hard flat Edgbaston decked played into the hands of our quicker bowlers. Also that a benign deck played into the hands of Steve Smith. Hello Michael and Nas we have some quality seamers and one or two blokes that can swing the Dukes too. Seems Smith can play on any surface as he showed in the first innings when there was still some live in that deck.

They want to spice it up. SA did this to SL and lost, though. I would play on a greenie myself, but the questions England need to find answers to is why are they with 18 counties, futher pro leagues, and a structure that identifies talent from just starting high school, completely and utterly unable to produce more high caliber batsmen. What makes this more obvious, is that Trott and KP were actually groomed and developed in South Africa to U19 levels.

I certainly don't blame t20 for this. There is something wrong with the English infrastructure if they have this money, and cannot produce better batsmen than what they are serving up at present. Their test batting is absolutely dire. Simply dire. I said it on a different forum, England has been rolled for under 100, no less than 3 times recently. And its not as though the NZ, WI and Irish attacks are lauded as the best in the world. Not to mention, Jason Holder scored a double century when the WI rolled them. 

And I am absolutely clueless as to what England can or should do to remedy the situation bar swapping Bairstow with Foakes. I have absolutely no idea who they should try. They've tried so many lately. And given them long runs of opportunities. The batting is woeful.

Wow!

Without Smith and Warner I think the Aus batting has been pretty bad too.

I would have thought Foakes should replace Bairstow as well.

The recent English  batting performances  have been appalling when I read these figures.

Yeah - but you have faith in the Australian production system still right? England has only produced one dominant batting team since the 1980's, when Cook, KP and Trott with Prior took them to number 1 with Bell and Strauss giving admirable support. But you take out KP and Trott, and that batting line up looks very very different and far less high calibre.

3 nations have the money to make the best cricketers. Australia, India and England. India is producing not only batsmen, but even fast bowlers now. Fast bowlers! To go with their spinners and fancy and vaunted batsmen. Australia continue to develop fast bowlers, and is in a bit of a pickle right now with batting depth. That said, the system put in place and produced a glut of talent since the 1980s. An absolute glut.

So what is England doing so wrong? Why is Australia and India producing batsman after batsman, regularly, and England not able to?

England has played some aboslute lemon batsmen since Boycott retired. Regularly. Team after team of them. And most of the best ones were built in SA.

See I just don't get it. How can they be failing to produce regular talent, when they have all these resources? 

No I'm not a massive advocate of the current Aus development system for many of the reasons Baggers has elucidated in aforementioned posts.

We have our worst generation of Test batters for some time. Cricket, like many sports, is simply orientated around money at present. 20/20 and BBL reign supreme in Australia. We now have a period in summer from early December until late February when no FC or Shield cricket is played. How can a break in nearly 3 months in the middle of the cricket season be conducive to developing quality red ball cricketers?

Moreover, our pitches are very poor in encouraging the development of spin bowlers.

The last point is that batters from overseas suggest it is too easy batting on Aussie wickets.

I've seen a fair bit of Test cricket on Kiwi pitches.

Your test wickets are easy. And right now CA has a batting depth crisis. But since the AIS and Academy in the 1980's - you went through the 90's the naughties, and most of this decade with great batsmen. 

• Michael Bevan (SA/NSW/TAS)
• Greg Blewett (SA)
• 
  
• Michael Clarke (NSW)
• 
  
• Callum Ferguson (SA)
• Adam Gilchrist (NSW/WA)
• 
  
• Brad Haddin (NSW)
• 
  
• Brad Hodge (VIC)
• David Hussey (WA)
• Michael Hussey (WA)
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• Simon Katich (WA/NSW)
• 
  
• Justin Langer (WA)
• 
  
• Shaun Marsh (WA)
• Damien Martyn (WA)
• 
  
• Tim Paine (TAS)
• Ricky Ponting (TAS)
• Michael Slater (NSW)
• Andrew Symonds (QLD)
• 
  
• Shane Watson (QLD/NSW)
• Cameron White (VIC)
• 
  

David Warner (expelled)

On top of this, Lejmann, Hayden and Hughes and many more were state made. There is nothing wrong with the Aus production lines for at least batting at home. England don't even have batsmen for home.\

Now in the same time frame, England has developed Cook and Root. Trott and KP were imports. Buttler and Prior is being generous to include them. But lets say we do. It doesn't compare.

There is nothing wrong with your spin bowlers. The Academy expelled Warne and graduated MacGill. But you lost years worth of options when you sought a new leg spinner where the was none. It took you years to play Lyon. And even then NSW overlooked Sommerville at a state level who can demolish Pakistan in UAE at test level.

England has one spinner in Leach who is quality. Ali is made spinner. Who has been useful at times. But he was made at intl level. Not even domestic. After Swann they had noone, before Swann, it was what? Panesar? Tuffnell? Embury?

What has really bothered me is how poor we have been on the Subcontinent.

I have read we are the worst performed team in the world in Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Despite how good we supposedly are at home, we have been awful away when most Aussie fans don't  see us play!

I have watched most of those Test matches.

Oh - you've been abysmal away recently. England (until this tour) and SA too. Your last away wins are probably NZ 2016 and WI 2015.

I contend we can't play swing, and we struggle to bowl effective spin - and  bat  effectively against it.

Outside Lyon, we have few quality spinners, and those who are reasonable get no encouragement on Aussie wickets.

Bellerive is excellent for swing  bowling and developing  batting skill against it, but according to Tassie's top spinner when I met him, Bellerive is really difficult to bowl spin  on. 

Bowlers like John Holland and O'Keefe aren't bad spinners when one sees them on the Subcontinent, but they receive little encouragement on Aus pitches.

Well it seems you want to build a team that is dominant everywhere. A new superstar team. Good luck with that. I dont see it happening again anytime soon in the world. I think the way teams will go from now on, is more horses for courses. England, Pakistan, NZ, India are very much doing that in selection these days. Aus will start doing this too soon. The entire bowling group gets discarded depending on where they are playing. And slowly, batsmen will start to be chopped out too pending surfaces and opposition. Foakes and Jennings look set to play for England in Asia, but not at home just now.

The old players like Waugh and Warne hate horses for courses. And a firm believers of an XI, maybe 12 if SENA playing in Asia, everywhere in the world. I don't agree with that at all. NZ, will I expect - go from no spinners in their last test team - to three vs SL in SL. Which 3 of four, and which 2 of 5 seamers remain, is the tougher question. Ferguson is not even touring SL, he prob wont play against England, but I imagine he surfaces vs Australia in Australia at some point.

India do it the most, with openers, #6, and the entire bowling attack up for grabs depending where they are. Jadeja, Ashwin, Kuldeep, Ishant, Bhuvi, Bumrah, Shami, Hardik all take turns. Rohit, Vihari, Rahul, and so on for the batsmen too.

Back on point, Paine suggests no changes to the second test team. 



https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/18659/report/1169533/day/3/worcestershire-vs-australians-tour-match-australia-eng-2019

This is not news mate. Australia has been poor in the sub cont for at least the past two decades. Steve Waugh called winning in India "the last frontier". Back home there is probably one state deck.. the SCG.. that you could term spin friendly.
What has CA done to address the massive problem? Very little until about the last 3/5 years. These days our best 16 year olds are sent to sub cont and embedded in local sides to learn to play in their conditions. Good move. CA also built and installed Indian style (soil) wickets at the NCC. Good move but has not entirely done the trick. Many past players advocate the pitches should be in a game situation as opposed for mere practice. CA has said it does intend making more of these spinning decks using Aussie soil at grass roots level thruout the country.

It wasn't 'last frontier' - that's Alaska, or the 'final frontier' is space and from Star Trek, Steve Waugh used "holy grail" instead, lol. While an acceptable cliche, the Crusades and the execution of Jesus can often stir up emotions, but be very thankful he didn't use "Jewell in the Crown" which your Rugby League players and personalities so often use to describe next to everything. I don't think Rugby Leage personalities are aware that the systematic exploitation of the British Raj (now India and Pakistan) was the "Jewell in the Crown" of the British Empire. The English have still not been forgiven for this by many Indians. 

First and foremost, to keep the sport healthy, a team has to win or compete well at home. The away tours compete with football, and are behind a pay tv wall, and do not get the some publicity as home summers. They are less important, except for the players and the deep fans. Fans like you and I. 

I think what DC is saying is that our spin bowlers dont get the chance to develop their skills because there are not sufficient spinning pitches available at state level. A good example is Ashton Agar. He is a fine bowler imo but where does he play most of his state cricket.. the WACA.. without doubt Australia's most spin unfriendly deck. While our other two international class tweakers Jon Holland and SOK have the MCG and SCG respectively.. both of which provide turn late in the match. I recall a match at the SCG few years back.. it turned from day one and by the last two days was an absolute dust bowl. SOK and Agar both took multiple wickets. From memory the West Aussie pipped SOK in the wicket tally.. and that is his home ground.

I don't see the problem here. You're not going to serve up Eng, NZ, let alone Ind, SL, Ban (should you ever host them) or Pak spinning decks in a test. But like you say, there is some turn on offer in Vic and NSW, Adelaide too can turn up a bit late. And Queensland could always cut more grass off.

Now if Australia wants to make some more and better spinners, find some young grade cricketers, send them to the Academy that Warne and McGill went too, and make some spinners. You have a spin centre in Queensland. You have the resources. Just use them more wisely. But given Agar wants to a pyjama player more than a test player, I don't really foresee him becomming a better red ball spinner any time soon. 

Zampa is from NSW and is still a joke among intl spinners. Quality batsmen never seemed troubled by him, while he does fare well against the weaker batsmen.

Too much focus on short form cricket since 2015. Batters have ‘forgotten’ how to bat for long periods?
Too much snobbery/exclusiveness in the sport - state schools hardly play the game (terrestrial tv doesn’t even show live matches). When I was a kid in the 70s cricket was the national (summer) sport, now in polls you hear 2% of kids listing it in their top two favourite sports to play or watch (of course football is utterly dominant in the country).

I dont blame short form cricket at all. I fear you're onto something with the snobbery and exclusiveness... I hope you're wrong.

Yes it is unfathonable.. given their structure and rich history. Where are the Hammonds, Hobbs, Huttons, Barringtons of today?

But where is the next level below these guys? Where is their depth players?

NZ right now is enjoying Henry Nicholls surge onto the world stage. But arguably - our best batsmen aren't even in the team as yet. 

Every single NZ fan knows that the next batsman will be Will Young, who has murdered runs in Australia against Starc, Cummins, Haze and co, made runs Pak A in the UAE and against Ind A in NZ. All in 1 year.

We have Devon Conway on eligibility count down from SA. Then there is the future boy wonder of Rachin Ravindra, who may or may not be a superstar. But lets just say there is expectations on him starring.

Not to mention that for most of the past 7 years, Jesse Ryder was basically sacked. 

If NZL has finally started producing quality intl batsmen, why isn't England? There is something totally wrong with the England system. It has to be wrong, cos its failing. Repeatedly. Decade after decade.

leech for moen is a good change. I guess joffra replaces anderson?

Indeed. Sam Curran with his left arm (pies included) variation is waiting in the wings.
Also bats - likely to get more runs than Denly.
What a mess, England. Get it sorted!

still a tough team, especially at home! We have a chance though

England are a tough side.

I think if Anderson had stayed fit they could have conceivably won.

There is a tour game on fellers. CA will be loathe to change a winning side but a good showing here and they are in the picture for the third Test. Head continued his good form .. tonning up. Khawaja 50, Bancroft got a start. for 35. 5d-266. At stumps Aussies in control 3-31.. Hazlewood 2-2.. Starc again leaking runs but took the other wicket. Seems CA is keeping Haze in the opening role.

Let us hope Haze produces his best form.

Curran could replace Stokes or Woakes, but they're not the big problems.

Leach for Ali I'd do for sure. Archer for Anderson. I think we all see those changes. But I'd go further. Foakes for Bairstow. And personally, I'd go TRJ for Broad.

Bayliss says Bairstow is staying. Curran bats too and we have plenty of lefties..so yes replace Stokes for mine. He took off the pressure at crucial times and his red ball batting has dropped off..unlike Woakes. Not a whisper about TRJ from Bayliss so Broad also stays. 

Joe Root criticised the bowler-friendly nature of the Edgbaston pitch but former skipper Nasser Hussain says England will need a green bowler-friendly pitch conducive to seam and swing bowling if they are the level the series.

He isn’t. 

He is quoting Root’s perceptions. 

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/cricket/114805736/ashes-2019-jofra-archer-poised-to-add-fire-to-englands-bowling-attack



But why? Hadlee dropped pace and became a better bowler. McGrath dropped pace and became a better bowler. Curtley slowed down and still took a ton of wickets. Medium pacers like Abbas and Philander are knocking people over for barely 20 runs a pop (Abbas is actually averaging under 19!).

I get the thrill of fast bowlers. I really enjoy watching Fergo and Milne break 150kms. But surely its results that matter more than the pace of the delivery. Now I get that England without Tremlett had their attack destroyed on Australian roads, and that has led to this situation where England is desperate for pace now, but pace, especially in England is not the be all and end all.

Pace has its place, but I'd take Stu Clarke, McGrath, Abbas or Philander over Brett Lee. And over Mitch Johnson too.

Archer, is a good bowler not simply due to pace, but cos he hits the target of where he wants to bowl more than the rest of players do. The only bowlers I know trying to maintain pace playing right now are Bumrah and Starc. But Bumrah is still accurate first and foremost.

Rabada, nor Pat Cummins, are rarely actually winding it up to max velocity all that often. They worry more about accuracy than pace. Despite both of them being capable of 150km/h - they actually bowl most balls these days in the 130's.

That is the Aussie in Bayliss. All Aussies love pace. He played on decks that provided pace. He was a very good bat from memory.

 I liked Cummin's heat and aggression in the last innings. He carried out the plan to ruffle the feathers of the openers and did it to perfection. His three wickets were as a result of accuracy and  sheer speed. Must have been pushing 150ks. As you say he has the ability to cut his pace and revert to line and length when the state of play warrants it. Cummins is a talented well rounded bowler.. reason he is currently ranked #1.

I recall Tremlett.. tall and fastish. Derived steepling bounce from a good length. I expect Archer will be suited to at least two Aussie decks

He was built like a pro wrestler or body builder. Absolutely huge man. Was never going to have a long career built like a tank and being a fast bowler. Retired from domestic at 32. Body wasn't upto it. He simply had far too much muscle. Should have been a spin bowler if he wanted a long career...