Qwerty30

I am not sure why you are gloating. I picked you up on the double standard of say Clarke should never been Captain and is not a leader but wanting to retaining him on as Captain.

Buchanan does not rate Clarke as a Captain but he has not hypocritically argued that he would have kept Clarke on for 12 months to mentor Smith. At least Buchanan could not be that stupid.

No problem with Clark the player & batsmen & tactician, none at all.... but he should never have been the Australian test captain. as Warne's showing, he shouldn't have been as well.

poor choice of leader.

10 days ago when other more astute posters were suggesting an early end for Clarke you suggested that he be kept on for 12 months for Smith's succession plan. A bizarre and ridiculous suggestion given you suggest he should never have been Test captain and is a poor choice of a leader.

I further note that 18 months ago against Sth Africa when Clarke was playing a heroic innings you will still deriding his character.

You're entitled to your opinions on Clarke but on what you've shown here there is little thoughtful or coherent substance to them.

And FTR Warne never captained Australia.

One for the Ignore list.

Good post Angry. Not sure the Clarke dissent deserved a basic serving of the obvious.

I would have added World Cup Captain.

Not sure why you have Siddle ahead of Starc. Ponting said that Siddle believed that if he was ever going to play Test Cricket again it was at Trent Bridge.

For mine Siddle is finished and selectors dont back him. He is no way an adequate replacement or even partial cover for loss of Harris.

Starc is our No 1 strike bowler and this series has proven it. He can certainly improve and I believe will. And I think we need to look beyond Johnson too in the next 6/12 months. He has looked flat for most of this series and has hardly put any fear in the Poms at Trent Bridge.

And I would not be throwing out Hazlewood after one poor series. He was v good up to the Ashes. He has had a lesson here but will come back.

At this stage Ahmed was not close to an Ashes Test but I would not be ruling him out. As a spinner he is still in his prime. The batting farce prevent a real assessment of where Lyon is at.

Appalling cricket, yet again....

Warner, Smith, Johnson and Lyon are the only players IMO who are a definitive part of the immediate future of Test cricket.

I'd have Starc there because at 25 he will get better. And after last night he showed he can perform under adversity. Might help if he bats up the order too.

Agree, our bowling stocks are well served, but it's always easier to bring in bowlers taking wickets than batsmen making runs. There are enough good quicks and spinning options on the sideline to offer support, but the batting...

I just can't believe we are getting pantsed by an English attack that includes, Ali, Finn and Wood (These guys would have been smashed all over the park by any Mark Taylor, Steve Waugh or even Ricky Ponting led sides). Our batting has been deplorable.

Interesting comments from Ed Cowan this morning who stated that Cricket Australia had ordered that flat pitches were to be prepared for Sheffield Shield. This allows players with technical deficiencies to look better than they are, but means that we get exposed on pitches where the ball actually starts to do a bit. Been like this for the last ten years. Once Clarke goes there's only two locks in the top six for mine.

Not surprised to hear that at all. Voges hits 1400 runs in the Shield last summer and looks all at sea against the moving ball. He clearly isn't the only one.

I think at the end of this series Clarke will be swiftly followed by Voges, S Marsh. Watson and Haddin already done. Only Warner and Smith are locks for mine. The ACB should working is butt off to convince Bucky Rogers to play for another 6-12 months to at least balance out the inexperience within the middle order being re built. For a starter I would drop S Marsh and pick M Marsh for the final test and start the rebuild process.

Great spirited bowling by Starc under adversity. While the batting has largely been a fail, Australia has sadly missed the skill, guile, experience of Ryan Harris.

I actually wish we were able to make 186.

Been calling all week that Siddle should have played here.

.

Can he bat?

I am waiting for someone to post that this would not have happen if Shane Watson was given a fair go and still there.

Aust bowlers can't make them play. Not good.

England 47 behind on the 1st innings at lunch on the 1st day with 10 wickets in hand.

Top score X(avier) Tras with 14. 11LBs and 3NBs

Should we ask the ICC for a priority pick at the end of series?

Rather than list those who could be gone come years end, i'll list those that i believe we need to keep (will save some time). The rest can be de-listed or traded for all i care.

Must keep in order of appearance on mfc website:

Hogan, N Jones, Salem, Viney, Lumumba, Brayshaw, Gawn, Tyson, Dunn, Stretch, Kent, Frost, Vince, Kennedy-Harris, T McDonald, Petracca, O McDonald, Neal-Bullen, Garlett, Jetta, vandenBerg.

That's 21/44 spots on the main and rookie list. Keep in mind these are the "must keeps" which include draftees from last year (too early to possibly cull). Others not listed will no doubt play a role and some of them will be important roles.

KPD's - 4 (Dunn, Frost, T McDonald, O McDonald)

SPD's - 3 (Salem, Lumumba, Jetta)

Mids - 6 (N Jones, Viney, Brayshaw, Tyson, Vince, Petracca)

Rucks - 1 (Gawn)

KPF's - 1 (Hogan)

SPF's - 3 (Kent, K-H, Garlett)

Other - 3 (Stretch, N-B, vandenBerg)

In my breakdown, it highlights our need for more 'must keep' Rucks, KPF's and Mids that can play in numerous positions.

Nothing we didn't already know. As already highlighted by another thread, fix our midfield problems and we give our forwards more opportunities and can negate our ruck weaknesses by roving the opposition.

We also need to find ourselves another quality KPF to support Hogan, as Dawes is clearly not it. Another good ruckman (provided Gawn makes it) will help handle the ruck load.

Our priorities for draft/trade:

1 - Mids

2 - KPF

3 - Ruck

Lumumba is not a must keep for mine.

We needs gets mids and we will need to secure a top ruck. Jamar is gone and we can't rely on Gawn to step up.

According to the demonland contracts thread we have a large number out of contract. You would think delistings would likely come from those out of contract.

The Thread lists the following player out of contract :Trengove, Jamar, Garland, McKenzie, Howe, Gawn, Fitzpatrick, Toumpas, Pedersen, Hunt, Cross, Bail, Riley, Harmes, King, Vandenberg, White.

I think Jamar and cross could hang up their boots at seasons end, meaning we would still be likely to make another 4-5 list changes. VandenBerg will be upgraded, and the other 3 rookies will likely be retained for another year.

There are a few on this list playing for their careers. Garland will be offered good money to stay, and you would think with Jamars pending retirement that Gawn and/or Fitzpatrick will get at least another 1-2 year deal until we figure out our ruck situation . Pedo has done enough for an extension, however he could be on the table for trade. The remaining list changes are likely to contain a bulk of the players I haven't mentioned, and the odd trade we don't see coming.

Howe will likely be traded, I hope he is used to secure an asset that will help us immediately.

Jamar Cross McKenzie - retire

Trengove - delist injury

Howe - Trade

Bail - delist

Has not won a flag since 1964. Only record that is important to me.

Australia toyed with England like a killer whale with a sea pup.

Really impressive polished performance especially when Watson and Hazlewood had days to forget.

Clarke and Faulkner have to come in and Watson and Hazlewood will go. Bailey did his job well yesterday. And with the all round benefits of Faulkner and Marsh, we have Watson covered.

Gee,there is a lot of people wanting to judge Starc a bit early.

Can see him playing over 60 tests in his career.

Totally agree.

Its the same premature condemnation that was levelled at Johnson.

Thanks to Rohit Sharma for gobbing off at Mitch Johnson before he had faced a ball, thanks heaps.

Goose.

Sharma is looking a right goose now.

Points to Mitch with bat and ball.

Gee, lyon desperately needs a short leg and a captain that can set him one.Might get another 100 wickets.

I do miss the easy catches that doolan dropped when there.

Might help if he could bowl a consistent smart line. But I guess that's the captains fault.....

Flat track, b grade bowling.

of course he will cash in.

Back is shot, he has lost a close mate......

How much easier can it get?

Maxwell has played his one and only test disgraceful dismissal in the second innings . Park Cricketer at best

He has played 3 tests and none of them suggest that he is more than an 20/20 Wizz-Fizz cricketer.

His selection was baffling and his batting at 3 was ridiculous.

I see Boof is suggesting that Marsh and Watson could both play.

I would prefer to see Watson at three in preference to Doolan leaving Marsh at 6 as he has a future imo.

If you want to have an allrounder at 6 then i would play Watson if fit and in form.

Not sure if Marsh is just a 10km slower version of Siddle who looked like he could not blow a candle out on a windy day. Good batting effort from Marsh.

Lyon is a conundrum. Should be better in those conditions but was picked off too easily.

We took one bowler in Johnson and thought we could trick our way through. Just dumb.

Cant understand the consternation of Warner. Fought a lone hand at the top of the order without support but still average over 50. Deserves respect.

Rogers does not burn his tickets yet on one poor short tour and with no ready replacement (Hughes against spin ....puleezze).

Not a great series for Clarke and this will give some joy to his detractors who have had to consume a terrible amount of humble pie in the past twelve months.

The Indian series would be a good time to transition the gloves to the next generation from Haddin who has been a wonderful servant and fighter for Australia.

We should only consider Tyler Roos on his merit as a future AFL player based on whether he can play or not..

I am not sure why its any imperative to get him though.

If he has any ability why isnt the Lions or the Swans falling over each other to get him under Father Son?