I'm hoping that if i keep saying Edgbaston 1981

I need to pull myself up here. I have made multiple references to Edgbaston 1981, when in fact i was referring to Headingly 1981. My apologies.

Some good news for Australia at least:

http://www.news.com.au/sport/cricket/the-ashes-2015-england-blow-as-jimmy-anderson-to-miss-trent-bridge-doubtful-for-the-oval/story-fndpt0dy-1227465403232

He's been below par Mitchell Starc, I don't think anyone can dispute that. But the delivery that he just bowled to dismiss Cook is the reason why he's probably beyond being dropped and Hazlewood's the guy who may struggle to hold his spot.

Clarke puts a regulation catch off Bell down.

Can this match get any worse....

He's been below par Mitchell Starc, I don't think anyone can dispute that. But the delivery that he just bowled to dismiss Cook is the reason why he's probably beyond being dropped and Hazlewood's the guy who may struggle to hold his spot.

Having said the above, the stats of the series so far actually suggest otherwise.

Before the start of England's second innings, so far this series Starc has taken 11 wickets @ 31.55 with an economy rate of 4.08.

On the other hand, Hazlewood's stats are much more respectable with 13 wickets @ 22.62 and an economy rate of 3.63.

Selectors will have 5 days to ponder I guess.

Clarke dropping Bell was the last tiny little chance we had in this Test.

It's hard to believe we're going to be 2-1 down against a side with Lyth, Bairstow, Stokes and Buttler in its top 7, Moeen as the spinner, and Finn as a pace bowler, but such is Australian cricket at the moment.

Marsh in for Voges, and I'd drop one of Starc or Hazlewood for Siddle - the stats suggest Starc is performing worse but Siddle is more like for like with Hazlewood than Starc.

Need to back Rogers, Warner and Smith in to make runs without Anderson bowling with the new ball at Trent Bridge, get a platform for Clarke (maybe put him down to 5 and put Marsh at 4) so that he can bat with a bit of freedom possibly.

Clarke dropping Bell was the last tiny little chance we had in this Test.

It's hard to believe we're going to be 2-1 down against a side with Lyth, Bairstow, Stokes and Buttler in its top 7, Moeen as the spinner, and Finn as a pace bowler, but such is Australian cricket at the moment.

Marsh in for Voges, and I'd drop one of Starc or Hazlewood for Siddle - the stats suggest Starc is performing worse but Siddle is more like for like with Hazlewood than Starc.

Need to back Rogers, Warner and Smith in to make runs without Anderson bowling with the new ball at Trent Bridge, get a platform for Clarke (maybe put him down to 5 and put Marsh at 4) so that he can bat with a bit of freedom possibly.

Agree with pretty much everything you say there TU.

It is amazing that we're going to be down 1-2, I guess the only heartening thing to take away from what the first three tests has shown us is that the matches seem to be on our batsmen. Our bowling, although inconsistent, is good enough to deal with England's brittle batting, so it just comes down to how our batsmen can perform.

So as yo said, Siddle in for one of Starc or Hazlewood to help provide some control and build more pressure. Shaun Marsh in for Voges, hopefully allowing Clarke to drop down the order. At least Nevill looks more likely to score some runs at 7 then what Haddin was.

An interesting selection dilemma, I have no great confidence that despite his form Shaun Marsh will make runs at Trent Bridge, but the only viable alternatives are Voges or Watson, so he has to come in. You wouldn't change the top 3, but I agree that Clarke dropping down to five might be what he needs. I would drop Starc. Hazlewood looked a lot more comfortable and bowled a better line to a more defensive field setting. I think bowling to four slips put a lot of pressure on him to do something with the ball when all he needed to do was bowl line and length - which is what Siddle does very well. The English lineup looks a lot better with Bell finding form at 3, so Clarke should take some heart from that. I really like Cummings, but Australia needs to get the basics right if its to level the series. Lyon is bowling well and Johnson is the X factor, but we need two other line and length bowlers nibbling away at off stump to build pressure. Starc won the world cup for us, but just isn't the same bowler with the red ball, if we could guarantee our top order fire, he stays in, but otherwise he just bleeds too many runs for the occasional unplayable delivery.

An interesting selection dilemma, I have no great confidence that despite his form Shaun Marsh will make runs at Trent Bridge, but the only viable alternatives are Voges or Watson, so he has to come in. You wouldn't change the top 3, but I agree that Clarke dropping down to five might be what he needs. I would drop Starc. Hazlewood looked a lot more comfortable and bowled a better line to a more defensive field setting. I think bowling to four slips put a lot of pressure on him to do something with the ball when all he needed to do was bowl line and length - which is what Siddle does very well. The English lineup looks a lot better with Bell finding form at 3, so Clarke should take some heart from that. I really like Cummings, but Australia needs to get the basics right if its to level the series. Lyon is bowling well and Johnson is the X factor, but we need two other line and length bowlers nibbling away at off stump to build pressure. Starc won the world cup for us, but just isn't the same bowler with the red ball, if we could guarantee our top order fire, he stays in, but otherwise he just bleeds too many runs for the occasional unplayable delivery.

Couldn't have said it any better myself grazman.

Clarke puts a regulation catch off Bell down.

Can this match get any worse....

I sense not all is smooth behind the scenes atmo.. too many players are off they're games collectively from the start of the series. batting fielding bowling, like there is a distraction going on.

Clarke dropping Bell was the last tiny little chance we had in this Test.

It's hard to believe we're going to be 2-1 down against a side with Lyth, Bairstow, Stokes and Buttler in its top 7, Moeen as the spinner, and Finn as a pace bowler, but such is Australian cricket at the moment.

Marsh in for Voges, and I'd drop one of Starc or Hazlewood for Siddle - the stats suggest Starc is performing worse but Siddle is more like for like with Hazlewood than Starc.

Need to back Rogers, Warner and Smith in to make runs without Anderson bowling with the new ball at Trent Bridge, get a platform for Clarke (maybe put him down to 5 and put Marsh at 4) so that he can bat with a bit of freedom possibly.

This shows we are well below our capacity, which we got nearer in the 2nd test.... to the poms credit, they keep us under pressure thru Anderson & Broad.

For so many in our camp, Including Smith & Clark, & even Johnson, something not right in our group.

I hope Warnie isn't making restless vibes. sense theres something going on, Re leaders, & power issues?

maybe 2 camps developing?

I'd bring S Marsh & Haddin in for Voges & Nevill ... Voges out because he hasn't made runs and we need Haddin's experience despite Nevill being a good prospect. Nevill's glovework against Lyon was average but it's more so that Haddin's batting in the late middle order that is badly needed. The next test is do or die.

I'd also reshuffle the batting order so as to make it more productive ... I also can't see Siddle being picked - Cummins is more likely but I reckon we'll keep the same 4 bowlers regardless. I do like the idea of having an experienced batsman and an experienced bowler in the squad but not necessarily as first choice for the test matches. So, the selectors have probably got that bit right with S Marsh and Siddle as back-ups.

My team in batting order ...

Rogers

Warner

Smith

S Marsh

Clarke (out of form and needs to drop down a rung for the foreseeable future)

Haddin (a temporary move to no.6 until M Marsh is more accustomed to test cricket)

M Marsh

Johnson

Starc

Hazlewood

Lyon

So, with my side we'd end up with a 5, 6 & 7 of Clarke, Haddin & M Marsh instead of Voges, M Marsh & Nevill. A much more solid look about it ... S Marsh can bat anywhere in the order but having a left hand bat to break up the 2 right handers in Smith & Clarke could put their bowlers off their line - remembering that they'll be missing the experience of Anderson. It's a big out for them and we need to take advantage.

.

Edited August 1, 201510 yr by Macca

I'd bring S Marsh & Haddin in for Voges & Nevill ... Voges out because he hasn't made runs and we need Haddin's experience despite Nevill being a good prospect. Nevill's glovework against Lyon was average but it's more so that Haddin's batting in the late middle order that is badly needed. The next test is do or die.

I'd also reshuffle the batting order so as to make it more productive ... I also can't see Siddle being picked - Cummins is more likely but I reckon we'll keep the same 4 bowlers regardless. I do like the idea of having an experienced batsman and an experienced bowler in the squad but not necessarily as first choice for the test matches. So, the selectors have probably got that bit right with S Marsh and Siddle as back-ups.

My team in batting order ...

Rogers

Warner

Smith

S Marsh

Clarke (out of form and needs to drop down a rung for the foreseeable future)

Haddin (a temporary move to no.6 until M Marsh is more accustomed to test cricket)

M Marsh

Johnson

Starc

Hazlewood

Lyon

So, with my side we'd end up with a 5, 6 & 7 of Clarke, Haddin & M Marsh instead of Voges, M Marsh & Nevill. A much more solid look about it ... S Marsh can bat anywhere in the order but having a left hand bat to break up the 2 right handers in Smith & Clarke could put their bowlers off their line - remembering that they'll be missing the experience of Anderson. It's a big out for them and we need to take advantage.

I'm not sure why Haddin would be considered more stable as a middle order batsman (let alone batting at 6) when he's average around 15 for the last year, whilst Nevill is coming off a 50 when he tried to hold the second innings together at Edgbaston.

Not bringing Haddin back can be debated, but Nevill took his chance and did more than enough to hold his spot.

Agree with dropping Clarke down a spot though - as a last-ditch attempt to get his form back, I'd bad S Marsh at 4 and Clarke at 5, with M Marsh at 6 and Nevill at 7.

I don't know if a change will be made to the bowlers, but I think it's really risky to play Cummins who's played just one first class game in two years. Siddle's deserved a recall and on that basis I think it would have to be Hazlewood who makes way (more like-for-like that way), but we may well leave it as you say.

I'd bring S Marsh & Haddin in for Voges & Nevill ... Voges out because he hasn't made runs and we need Haddin's experience despite Nevill being a good prospect. Nevill's glovework against Lyon was average but it's more so that Haddin's batting in the late middle order that is badly needed. The next test is do or die.

I'd also reshuffle the batting order so as to make it more productive ... I also can't see Siddle being picked - Cummins is more likely but I reckon we'll keep the same 4 bowlers regardless. I do like the idea of having an experienced batsman and an experienced bowler in the squad but not necessarily as first choice for the test matches. So, the selectors have probably got that bit right with S Marsh and Siddle as back-ups.

My team in batting order ...

Rogers

Warner

Smith

S Marsh

Clarke (out of form and needs to drop down a rung for the foreseeable future)

Haddin (a temporary move to no.6 until M Marsh is more accustomed to test cricket)

M Marsh

Johnson

Starc

Hazlewood

Lyon

So, with my side we'd end up with a 5, 6 & 7 of Clarke, Haddin & M Marsh instead of Voges, M Marsh & Nevill. A much more solid look about it ... S Marsh can bat anywhere in the order but having a left hand bat to break up the 2 right handers in Smith & Clarke could put their bowlers off their line - remembering that they'll be missing the experience of Anderson. It's a big out for them and we need to take advantage.

.

I know your a Haddin fan Macca and I have no doubt that the likely plan coming into this series was for it to be Haddin's swan song. But now that the change has been made when it did for the 2nd Test (no matter what the reasons for the change were) and Nevill did a decent job, it's hard to mount a case to go back to Haddin now.

Haddin was huge for us when he came back into the XI for the 10 Ashes Tests of 2013/14, but since then he has played 12 Tests averaging 15.24 with the bat which is boosted with 4 not out scores. He's had 21 innings, only passing 22 on two occasions with 1 fifty and has managed 3 ducks. And the even more alarming thing was that his glove work at Cardiff was poor, which included dropping Root on 0 which could well have been a game/series changer. Given Nevill's had two scores of 45+ in his three innings and his glove work hasn't been any worse, I can't see them going back, but I'm not a selector.

As for Siddle being yesterday's man, coming into this series I agreed with you 100%. However our bowlers are struggling to build any type of pressure and their consistency is off. This is where Siddle with his experience, line & length could be very useful. It would be a hard call either way as to who to leave out though. As we know, Starc can bowl some unplayable deliveries, however he's going at more then 4 an over for the series @ over 30 (average) and has only taken 5 wickets in the last 2 Test. While although Hazlewood's the leading wicket taker in the series, there just seems to be something off about him. Maybe as Grazman suggested, he's just had the wrong fields set, and that could be all he needs.

So yes, there's grounds for Siddle to come in IMO, but there's equal argument for no change to that department, as we have taken 60/60 possible wickets. But I think S. March in for Voges with S. Marsh to bat at 4 and Clarke at 5 is something we all think is a good idea. And as for Nevill/Haddin, I'd be sticking with Nevill and hopefully Mitch Marsh can find some form with the bat. His bowling is pretty handy for mine.

Edited August 1, 201510 yr by AngryAtCasey

I'm more thinking of how to win this particular test rather than any long term or short term solutions with the keeping spot. Nevill's keeping to Lyon in the 3rd test was at times amateurish - missing balls completely and not gloving the ball well ... I thought he moved a bit too slowly to the quicks too - especially taking balls down the leg side. Ian Healy made some pointed comments - and he'd know.

Haddin dropped a soda in Cardiff but other than that, he kept to his usual standards. Haddin brings a wealth of experience, know-how & leadership where as Nevill is trying to find his way in the grand final of test series. So are Mitch Marsh, Voges, Starc & Hazlewood for that matter. That's a lot of inexperience.

Nevill probably deserves a good go at it but my idea of an extended run in test cricket is not always to play every test uninterrupted. McGrath was rested or dropped 5 times in his first 9 tests.

Sometimes we're in too much of a hurry to get rid of experienced players too quickly - the balance of the side is all important. Once Mitch Marsh was preferred to Watson then I would have kept Haddin in - especially when we already had an unproven newcomer in Voges in the side.

A 5,6 & 7 of Voges, M Marsh & Nevill didn't hurt us in at Lords because of the Rogers/Smith partnership but that same 5,6 & 7 line-up let us down badly in the just completed test.

My reasoning of having Haddin at 6 and Mitch at 7 is that both might be better overall value with that configuration rather than the other way around. One has loads of experience whilst the other doesn't. I accept that Nevill will probably play though and I genuinely wish him well - if he does do well with the gloves, I'll give him due credit.

However, the selectors will be picking a team to win this next test match - not necessarily with an eye on getting games into new players ... so, it wouldn't surprise to see 3 changes. Anyway, time will tell.

.

Edited August 2, 201510 yr by Macca

Crucial test match starts tonight. And from what i'm hearing a lot of the changes we've discussed (S. Marsh for Voges, Clarke to 5 & Siddle for Hazlewood) are setto occur.

Come on Aussies, lets win the toss, bat and get 400 on the board!

And that's it - Ashes almost certainly gone.

3/10 after 8 balls. Clarke moves down to 5, already batting 6 minutes in.

Dear lord, 4/16 after 16 balls. Rogers, Warner, Marsh all get ducks.

Voges, shunted down to number 6, is already at the crease 20 minutes into the innings.

This is the Test with the Ashes on the line. What an inept response.

How does it get worse?! Voges' technique abysmal. Rogers, Smith, Marsh and Voges all out due to poor technique.

6-29. Stunning. Broad 5-6.

wtfigo?

Horrendous batting. Absolutely horrendous batting. They're doing a good job of showing it on TV right now.

Smith, Marsh, Voges, Clarke, Nevill all pathetic technique - awful feet positioning, playing away and in front of the body, gaps between bat and pad.

This is, honestly, the most inept batting innings I've ever seen. The bowling is good but not unplayable. It's swinging, but not a mile.

This is just awful batting. Front foot doesn't move. Playing miles away from the body. Playing in front of the front pad to the swinging ball. Gaps between bat and pad. Heads all over the place. Not capable of leaving the ball. Not capable of watching the ball onto the bat. Not capable of playing late. Not capable of bunkering down and just trying to survive (Marsh, Voges, Clarke and Starc all dismissed driving).

Edit: still on track for 47 all out...

Edited August 6, 201510 yr by titan_uranus

So much for looking forward to a couple of sessions tonight. If they are none for 50 odd i will spew up!

So much for looking forward to a couple of sessions tonight. If they are none for 50 odd i will spew up!

I'm confident they will be. Starc will lack control, Hazlewood isn't menacing enough, and their batsmen aren't technically flawed like ours.

We might bowl them out for 200 or 250, but that of course won't matter now.