Mahmood is strong in personality and pace but tends to get carted around. Lewis and Alderman can't really be mentioned in the same sentence.

It's a pity Anderson isn't fit as he is the one with the most potential, but his introversion didn't go down well with Nasser.

I can't see Plunkett doing much and he gets more than his fair share of ducks for someone who is supposed to be able to bat.

I like Broad's spirit and skill, but this series is dangerously early for him. However, I reckon he could and should go, along with Mahmood who shows more batting potential than Plunkers...

Retaining the Ashes is the most important thing right now in English test cricket (obviously), and the team selection has to reflect this. We can worry about the future generation next summer - this tour is about the here and now.

Lewis won't play many tests - he's above 30 and doesn't have the raw talent of so many young bowlers but potential and raw attributes alone mean nothing now. Mahmood may well help England beat Australia but in 2009.

Having said that, these selectors (for all their good picks) are stubborn and are unlikely to change their views on Lewis or Mahmood.

I would take Lewis. He has done everything asked of him and looks to be a scrapper with the bat. He can't be compared to Alderman yet, but has to be given a chance. It would be fun to watch Langer and Hayden falling over and being struck on the pad as often as Goochie in '89. (Just hope that they don't treat him like Gower treated Alderman in Sydney in 91!) Sure he is 30, but much less injury prone than the other bowlers in-line. Might not make the starting eleven but has to be in the squad. Not meaning to compare to Alderman again but he was deadly in his thirties. I would play Panesar, Harmison, Hoggard, Flintoff and alternate Lewis and Giles depending on how green a surface they get. Lewis could be a matchwinner at the Gabba. And hope that Jones can bolster the bowling after the first couple of tests if needed.

Fletcher's insistance in looking forward means he's always picking a "development" side for some tournament that never arrives.

We've got to go for the best bowlers NOW - and that is Hoggard, Harmison , Flintoff, Panesar and one other seamer - Lewis - He gives control that no other England international bowler has this at the moment.

If Simon Jones is playing grade cricket in OZ - i'd get him back in as soon as possible though - He and Vaughan are the two we'll really miss.

Paul Clarke

If the selcetors in their wisdom had picked Lewis at the begining of the Summer against Sri Lanka that series would not have been drawn and Englands summer would have been more productive. The "horses for courses" argument just didn't stack up as Lewis had been around the Test side for some time and had already destroyed Sri Lanka in the opening England A match!!

I can appreciate the need to build for the future and we seem to have a crop of talented young players coming through, Broad and Mahmood especially, But this is all about winning a series. The Ashes is not about rebuilding or potential it is about pride and being competitive against the best side in the world and if the results go our way England could be number one.

Lewis must go!! the others do not have the accuracy or psyche to withstand the full Aussie onslaught.

Maybe you can't mention Lewis and Alderman in the same breath, nor Lewis and McGrath, but you don't have to bowl above 90mph to take wickets. A team should have a blend of approaches, and building pressure on the batsmen at one end can lead to wickets at either end. England's all round team performance last summer consistently stiffled Australia. Mahmood seems to have potential, but you can't say that he builds pressure through keeping it tight, not yet at any rate. One set of economical figures in the last ODI aside, his economy rate was consistently high all summer.

Your kidding comparing Alderman to any of those bowlers, but also inaccurate in characterising Flemming as lacking pace.

Flemming was much quicker, even on his shortened run-up. Regularly clocking 140ks plus; his side-on action generated the best bouncer in the Australian attack for sometime.

England's pace won't be as important as their control and awkward bounce. Forget reverse swing, the conditions and ball won't promote it. Yes, Steve Harmison is going to have to finally lead the attack if England wants to keep the urn.

With Fletcher's beleif as pace as the sina qua non in test cricket Mahmood is a shoo-in ahead of Lewis. Alderman incidentally was a good bit faster than Lewis in any case. But whatever happened to Chris Tremlett? Wasn't he supposed to be the next "cab on the rank"

What more can Lewis do? He's got one of the best averages in the county champs, comes into the ODI side and get the best average for a seamer. OK this may all be on english soil, but if you don't give him a chance how do you know how he'll do abroad? I'd rather see him in the Ashes, than have Mahmood spray it all over the place.

The situation with Anderson is simple. Can't pick him today because he isn't fit. But if he were to get fit and firing its obvious he should be brought in - even half way through the tour - as the only class support to hoggard, flintoff and harmy. The same applies to S Jones.

Lewis must be on standby - essentially for Hoggard as having the two in the same team would leave England short of good old ball bowling.

Mahmood is needed as a pacy old ball bowler who, in addition, is looking like he can score runs despite having a tailenders mentality to shot selection.

Out of Plunkett and Broad - well maybe both but if you have to choose Broad> He has a better nose for wickets, superior accuracy and variety and enough in terms of pace and bounce.

I don't know if Duncan Fletcher saw Alderman's or Fleming's Test careers, but he certainly would have seen Lewis' Test debut earlier this summer.

Once the shine went off the ball he was carted round the park. Lewis is the archetypal English county bowler, and the notion of playing him on Australian pitches is ludicrous.

England should just hope that Anderson will be fit. He played well in the fast bowlers' graveyard named India, so he can perform overseas. He's certainly a class ahead of Mahmood, Plunkett and Lewis. I'd rate him only a shade behind the pace attack England had in 2005, when all four premier pace bowlers were at their best.

Tim

I think you've honed in on an important point here. In the absence of Jones, it's important a talisman is found.

I disagree with you on Jon Lewis, as I think he'd be fodder on Aussie pitches (ironically with the exception of Perth into the Fremantle Doctor). Your point about Alderman ignores that he had a poor record away from England, and Fleming was actually deceptively sharper than Lewis.

Mahmood and Plunkett have to be given a try; at worst they'll not be up to it, learn a bit about bowling on hard and fast pitches and use that experience later in their careers.

Anderson did well in Australia last time - question is whether he can recapture that freshness he exhibited back then - and importantly the swing. If not, he may simply come onto the bat nicely.

I honestly don't see Harmison or Hoggard doing great damage, so for me if England are to give themselves a chance to win, Panesar and Flintoff have to share 50 wickets between them.

i was actually disappointed not to see broad in the touring party.he would have been a surprise & a potent threat to australia.and lack of ashes experience isn't a problem at all(michael vaughan was brilliant in his first ashes tour).
i wud rather see anderson ahead of the others.he made his one day debut in australia & would love to see him do well.if he gets it right he can be a wicket taker as he was in his early days.
mahmood is really not up to international class and i dunno why are the selectors sticking with him.he may produce the occasional performance but is very inconsistent .one thing you need to do against aussies is to be always on top of your game.

and we can surely forget lewis.hoggard struggled last time around & lewis is definitely not as good as him.

my feelings are that england should play harmison, hoggard, flintoff and anderson, as all four have shown their class at test level, (anderson albeit rather briefly). With this you can add either panesar or giles, or on a dusty, spinner friendly wicket, both at the expense of anderson.

But, if anderson is injured it all seems to fall appart and we need another bowler. But why?? i wonder if anyone has ever considered the fact that Australia dominated world cricket for years without a genuine all rounder, limiting them to 4 bowlers. why must england take 5? surely the number of bowlers should depend on the situation of the game, pitch, weather, etc..

could harmisson, hoggard, flintoff and panesar not cope? well, not if the three pace bowlers try to bowl all day and take on the workload of a fifth bowler, but 90 overs in a day split between 4 bowlers is 22.5 overs each, or 3 7/8 over spells. why is that impossible?? if the pitch on the first day or two is two green to risk bowling a spinner then collingwood is a usefull option to bowl through 7 or 8 overs of economical medium pace which is tight enough to go at less than 5 an over in ODI cricket. or bell or trescothick even for a short spell.

my point is this - for many years england have been accused of picking a spinner who wasn't good enough for test cricket, simply so they could have one, i feel that now they might end up doing the same with a fourth seamer. It might not be that they aren't good enough, but not necessary. I can't see what any of the other seam options give to the side, well, maybe lewis. (see below)

england's additional options

not mahmood - although he has, very briefly shown glimpses of his potential to remove batsmen he has also shown his potential to gift a side 20-30 quick and easy runs which could prove extremely costly. Imagine Australia 130-5 and mahmood is brought back into the attack. suddenly, from being under severe pressure a few overs of rubish bowling and they're 170-5 and both batsment are now settled and with runs to their name.

Lewis might prove a useful option, but i doubt fletcher would ever play him. England seem to be obsessed with 'raw pace'. Think of mark ealham, played 8 tests and took his wickets at 27 a piece, averaged low 30's as a batsmen for kent and 2 50's for england.but was discarded from the test team because he wasn't quick. I feel lewis will be the same.

Plunkett, in my opinion seems a little bit short of genuine test quality (for now).

I Believe England will be very competitive but will need Harmsison to really stand up and lead the attack . He had a tremendous start to the 05 Ashes series but faded at the end . On our harder pitches his bounce will be difficult to handle but he is a little fragile .Making Flintoff captain will help him though and he really has a chance to stamp himself as world class bowler . Also if Simon Jones is playing grade cricket and is fit i wouldnt hesitate to bring him in as well . Panesar could be handy as well and if he can keep his nerve when the Aussies go after him just maybe England will have enough variety to really push for the no 1 spot . However i believe on our pitches England wont make enough runs and without Vaughan it will be even harder . Aussies to win 3-1 .