I really can't see england playing two spinners at any stage. Sydney at a pinch but can you really justify it over a batsmen when a drawn series is all that needed it retain the ashes?

I doubt the english selectors are that brave espically since giles hasn't played in months. Even at his peak he was barely effective at international level, let alone against Australia.

I agree that Giles probably isn't worth his weight in the side as a bowler, even at Sydney (and especially if there are doubts over his fitness) - what England will perhaps worry about is the balance he lends to the side by strngthening the lower order - as opposed to England having the rabbits Hoggard, Harmison, Panesar and A.N.Other (Broad, Tremlett, Anderson, even Mahmood is no all-rounder - Plunkett alone of England's bowling reserves has offered promise with the bat) at 8-11. Giles had also grown into a handy gully before injury - Monty especially is renowned for the runs he might cost you in the outfield. And of course Giles played a big part in the Ashes success, gritting out the winning runs at Trent Bridge, that ball to Damien Martyn. I shouldn't be surprised if they went and picked a maybe-fit Giles anyway.

Giles needs to get fully fit before even being considered. Take Dalrymple, and even if he doen't play in the Test series he'll have had time to adjust to the conditions prior to the one-dayers and will be comfortable around the squad.

England definitely should pick at least two specialist spinnersin the Ashes squad. Both Sydney and Adelaide are notable 'turners' and traditionally it has been the slow men that have taken the wickets at these venues. Australia have mede a habit of playing two leggies at sydney each year with warne and macgill and this is no coincidence.
Panesar will gain the first spot as spinner on tour and the second spot i believe should go to...no, not giles, batty or any other boring, ineffective finger spinner but surreys ian salisbury.
Yes thats right, Salisbury has had a splendid season with surrey taking 50+ championship wickets and is in the form of his life. His attacking leg breaks and googlies would be suited to sydney and adelaide. Plus he would provide a great foil for panesar and he has experience on Australian wickets (he has been a proven performer in sydney grade cricket).

Dalrymple...bigger turner of the ball, far better bat (be a strong batting line up if he was at number 8), far better fielder....no contest.... unlucky Gilo.

IAN SALISBURY??????? everyone seems to want to go back to the nineties. Why? Some great music but in Cricket??? A time of few victories and even less skill ( Botham being passed it and Gower and Russell ridiculously and continuously overlooked) If only Salisburys bowling average could be traded for Ramps' batting average!

Salisbury is a no no. He is still one of those leg spinners who tends to roll over rather than really rip it. Giles is not fit and for this reason must not go. It is not clear in any case that he is a better overall player than Dalyrmple. If you do play two spinners on one or two pitches the question is what will be the 2nd spinners role? Monty will bowl a large amount of overs. Dalyrmple will be enough with the ball and would bat nicely at 7 with read at 8.

Giles' selection says to me one of two things

1. There's room for sentiment in an English Ashes squad, or
2. The English selectors have no idea what a good spinner is.

Giles wouldn't get a game for an Aussie state side. To call him an all rounder makes Brett Lee a superstar batsman, and to call him a useful fielder would give Tuffers a shot in the arm for a comeback.

Honestly, if you had to take a second spinner instead of another pace option, surely you'd choose a young chap like Dalrymple.

Ian - "Giles wouldn't get a game for an Aussie state side"?

Impressive though the Australian team's air-brushing of history is, even they must recall how Giles dismissed each of their top seven at least once during last years rubber.

And as for Aussie state sides, if the likes of Dan Cullen (no relation!) can not only get a game for a State, but a central contract, with a first class bowling average of forty, the cupboard must be pretty bare. Giles, with his first class average in the twenties, would surely be welcomed with open arms.

Furthermore,perhaps Giles and Brett Lee have more in common than you might think; both have Test bowling averages in the thirties, Lee has three Test fifties, Giles four.

However, only one of the two feels compelled to die his hair...

And I'm not even a Giles fan!

Michael Cullen, I'm impressed with your recant, and I'll try to do it justice.

Dan Cullen at 21 is being given a chance at exposure to international level, admittedly before he's fully established his credentials. Much as I think England should do with Dalrymple. He's been given a contract based on potential rather than on performance.

Giles may well have a bowling average in the twenties in county cricket, but then so has Dominic Thornely, which says more about county cricket than Giles. Thornely hardly bowls for NSW.

And Giles may have dismissed each of Australia's top order last year, much to Terry Alderman's embarrassment, but at a cost you couldn't possibly justify.

Ian - Fair comments.

To conclude, I think it's probably fair to say that Giles isn't as bad as most of Australia seems to think, but nowhere near as good as Duncan Fletcher believes either!

His jerky, stiff-legged bowling has been thrown into even sharper relief by Panesar's exploits this summer.

I fear he will be rushed back with indecent haste, however.

Ian Salisbury?????? That would be disaster. Even Geoffrey Boycott would squirm at the very thought. And he is the chairperson of Giles-can't-bowl-to-my-mum club.

Monty is the only spinner who should play but stop laying into 'Gilo' everyone.