xgorton
Well-Known Member
Or a brain maybe.They’ll need eyes in the back of their head.
Or a brain maybe.They’ll need eyes in the back of their head.
That's the sensible solution, so they obviously won't even consider it.
Whichever way they go there is no obvious candidate. I think Stokes would be the best fit, particularly if we play the extra bowler.Crawley
Duckett
Ali
Root
Brooke
Stokes
Bairstow
Woakes/Lawrence
Broad
Tongue
Robinson/Wood
I guess it could look like that. Still think the number 3 spot is problematic for England.
Stokes could play further up the order, but I just don’t feasibly see that happening. If England have to bowl first and he’s had his share of the overs, then potentially going in to face the secone delivery would not be optimal. The same is true for Bairstow after a day behind the stumps.Whichever way they go there is no obvious candidate. I think Stokes would be the best fit, particularly if we play the extra bowler.
Think Wood is a definite, before Lords they said he was a week away. I was impressed with Tongue but I fear he will be the one to miss out. Who takes the new ball will one consideration.
That 2005 team didn't lose a game in the series.View attachment 85408
ESPN cricket poll has the 2005 team way ahead of the current Aussie team .
The 2005 time had the edge on them as far as batting goes but even with Warne i'd say the 2023 has a better attack.View attachment 85408
ESPN cricket poll has the 2005 team way ahead of the current Aussie team .
Not in squadFoakes in Bairstow as a batsman.
Same logic surely applies to Ali at 3?Stokes could play further up the order, but I just don’t feasibly see that happening. If England have to bowl first and he’s had his share of the overs, then potentially going in to face the secone delivery would not be optimal. The same is true for Bairstow after a day behind the stumps.
Looking forward to it but just hoping everyone can behave themselves (crowd included) and allow the game to be played hard but fair.