Hmm, you haven't gone for the best composite teams? Why not? Surely Trescothick should open with Cook?

Would Swap in Hussey and Clark for M Waugh and Gillespie.

In truth Australia because they have more about them.

Well, England won the 2005 ashes and are going to win the 2013 ashes so I would say England.

i think the bowling line ups are pretty interesting. obviously aus have 2 all time greats, but whilst lee and particularly gillespie were very good bowlers, i'd say england's change bowlers are definitely stronger. although lee could bowl some great spells, he could be loose too and i think he was a little over rated.

i actually would fancy australia though, really due to gilchrist, warne and especially s waugh. the key to beating that australia team would be to get on top of waugh, and that would be a hell of a task - even for that bowling unit.

England would win, assuming they got lucky enough ...

Clark
=====

wow !

Stuart Clark was a great bowler.

Perhaps not as good as Gillespie, you may be right there. The OP does say at the peak of form however, so maybe an argument can be made.

Stuart Clark was a great bowler
=====================

06/07 Ashes took 26 wickets at 17, outbowled McGrath.

Played very well in the time he was given, was probably already past it when he toured England in 09.

In their prime and in-form you couldn't look past that Australia team you've put up. They'd comfortably beat us IMO.

That's not a slant against the England XI, as its a very good side, just that the Aussies side has a handful of truly great players.

The greatest spinner of all time, one of the great fast bowlers, a wicket keeper who batted like a no 3 and 2 of their, what, 5 greatest batsmen ever arguably. That line-up bats forever.

That England team would beat any side currently active, including SA (just about) but that's about it. If you replace Root with Trescothick or Strauss that is.

i take your point major, but i reckon england would have a chance in england.

the aus batting line up is really the same as 05 but with steve waugh instead of katich, and the england bowling line up is about the same but with swann instead of giles.

RM,

Don't get me wrong it's a top side that you've put down with change at the top order that's been suggested. They would certainly bowl well in England at least and cause any batting line-up problems but the inclusion of the Waugh brothers really tips the scales for me.

Most angles are covered in that batting line-up, it's got flair, grit in spades and a destructive batsman at 7.

Puts England's in the shade.

This England team has a decent bowling attack on paper, but inconsistent, barring Swann and perhaps Anderson.

It's hard to predict when harmless becomes harmful.

----

As TG Major says, this Australia team is very very strong and with McGrath and Warne in the bowling ranks, should win 3-1 in England and 5-0 in Australia.



Don't count on Jones being fit for a full series.

Flintoff is predictably consistent with offstump line, but how often did he bag 5 wickets in a test match?

Vaughan - average
Root - unproven yet
Bell - slightly better than average
Cook - top class
KP - truly top notch
Swann - top class
Prior - better than average

prior's probably in the top 5 wicketkeeper batsmen of all time, so yes he would be better than average.

when on form bell is as good as any player in the world, so yes again he would be better than average too.

Lol what is root doing there?

Totally overrated who got lucky in the last test. People really need to stop licking his ball sack when hes proved nothing.

he plays some lovely shots though. the article says that the players are at their peak, so with root this might be a few years down the line. bearing in mind how strong the aussies are, i think we need to gamble.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

tresco too vunerable outside off stump. strauss not consistent enough, imo.

if you really want i'll change it, but root is in there on the basis that he will get better and we'll use him at his peak.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

I'd be surprised if his average was more than 42 come the end p his career though.

========================

higher than strauss then ?

ive changed the article anyway (a bit )

After his first 19 tests, Mike Hussey had a batting average of about 80!

Had he been injured and retired, we would have forever wondered if he was the next Bradman. He still completed his career with an outstanding average of 51.

The moral of the story is that great players are the ones who maintain their high performance over a long career, which is why someone like Tendulkar is great.

History of test cricket is loaded with hundreds of players who started off nicely like Joe Root and finished with an average of <40.

This is true of bowlers too. Bob Massie was simply unplayable in one Ashes series. He swung the ball both ways and disguised his art so well that some of the best English batsmen were clueless. More recently, we had Ajantha Mendis who was a mystery man for a year or so.