I agree, Tim. More apt than one-day form, which you rightly point out is not necessarily transferrable to the longer game, is the respective post-Ashes form of the two teams. I think, Champions Trophy apart, which is obviously a boon for Aussie cricket fans, that Australia has done enough to rectify the problems which beset the team in 2005. And on the question of age, I think that one is a bit of a furphy, at any rate with Hayden and Langer and other batsmen. Cricket isn't football in this respect.

Agree with almost eveything except I can see Giles playing ahead of Panasear (disastrous).There seems to be a school of thought that netting including non-competetive matches is all the pracise needed. I may be old fashioned but there can be no substitute for playing proper cricket

I agree with most of what you have said, Tim. I feel that a drawn series is the best England can get. In my opinion, the absence of Simon Jones is a bigger blow to the English team, than is the absence of Michael Vaughan. So much depends on Pieterson and Flintoff - one often wonders whether the pressure will finally have an effect on Pieterson, especially with the Aussie fans and the media around, waiting to pounce on an opportunity to try and hold him back.

All this aside, I think it will still be a great series. The first day willbe all-so-important in setting the tone for the series... Ask Ponting.

Finally a sound post from Tim!

Aussies will not just win the ashes. They will do it in style!

Panesar is a still a spinning embryo,but surely given his quality and the batsmens inexperience in facing him he strengthens the team.Quality spin has been the missing link for a generation and now we have it.The ashes will be won by a better or greater announcement on the world stage of the more peripheral talents in both teams.Watson and johnson for australia and Panesar mahmood or Anderson for England.This is connected to age and injury.The third seamer is critical for australia because an overeliance on Mcgrath will cost australia runs-he is an ageing new ball specialist-and for England because the frgaility of Flintoffs feetburdens another bowler.James Andersen is the key to ashes triumph.

I know the age thing is always dredged up in pre-ashes hype but how about looking at it from a different perspective. The likely 1st XI (Monty not Ashley) for England on the 23rd Nov will have an average age of around 26.5 compared to the Australian (Clarke and Johnson) 32.5. Now in this series it may not have a bearing and messr's Haydn, Langer, Martyn, Gilchrist, Warne and McGrath will no doubt bat all day and take a shed load of wickets. But how about 2009....the same English team will have an average age of 29.5, the Australians...35.5. If the Australians listed previously retire after a successful series what will the team look like in 2009. Didn't this happen post 1983 when Chappell, Marsh et al all reired? Wasn't the Australian team largely awful 1983-1989....anyone seeing similarities here. What happened to the ruthless streak of the Aussie selectors (David Boon etc)?

You could just as well have headlined this "On this form England will lose the ashes".

It's not just form it's also attitude. While the English team and media were making a virtue out of being terrible at one day cricket and moaning about how the champions trophy was meaningless anyway, the aussies got on with playing cold, hard, professional cricket and notched up yet another tournament victory under their belt.
Despite the difference in formats, the Aussies go into the ashes confident in their dominance of international cricket and the English face alien conditions firmly on the backfoot. I fear a drubbing.

All the analysis is right, but Australia are going to win back the Ashes anyway, be they in top form or not. In the spirit of competition, the English will do well to aim for at least a draw. (Otherwise the whole encounter will be pointless). But from a practical perspective, it must be reiterated that even such hopes are lofty. There is just too much at stake against the English: they are missing some key players (Vaughn and Jones); they are playing in foreign territory; their team is quite inexperienced in comparison to the Aussies; they are known to have players who can be exceptional when at home but quite ineffective playing away...the list is long.

No, I would be surprised if the English can win even a single game. I know there are many out there who, for whatever reason, will choose to differ. There has been talk of the aging Aussies and their slowing reflexes working in England's favour. It is a valid point, but, as we will see, it holds little substance. Rather, we might as well analyze its flipside: with age comes greater experience.

Let's not make a big deal of this Ashes series. Barring miracles--such as McGrath stepping on another cricket ball--the result is pretty predictable. Once in Australia, the Ashes will not cross the Equator again at least for a couple of years.

Come on Tim! Don't underestimate the impact of summer 2005. There is very little to choose between the teams and I really feel that the extra 18 months of old father time passing will have blunted that aussie edge even more. I predict that this will be a series too far for the current World Champions and we will see a major overhaul of the host team early next year, plus the installation of Mike Hussey as captain. However, on a slightly less bold note, a 2-2 draw would have me cheering in my pajamas through the cold winter nights.

Very true words. Australia are rightly favourites, but anything can happen. The thing is though, so long as it's a competitive series, as an England fan I wouldn't mind too much if Australia win as it would be a last hurrah for this Aussie team - how many of Langer, Hayden, Martyn, Gilchrist, Warne, McGrath, even Lee will be in England in 2009? We've broken the hoodoo, we're no longer scared of them, so it should be a great series, 2-2 and we keep the Ashes will do fine!

Hi there,i am an englishman who has been living in Australia for twenty years.Dont england hold the ashes??Im already tired of the wimps that have been sent here.Harmison sorry about hurting ponting,tresco worried about sledging!Either find some ticker or go home,come on Freddie what happened to The Bulldog?Some of us have to live here fulltime if the Lions can do it?You guys can go home in 3 months time unlike us ex-pats....

There are some chinks in Aussies armoury which people tend to ignore.Ponting has been in dismal form offlate.Brett Lee was erratic against India and West Indies(went for more than 7 an over in first spell).Add to that both Langer and Hayden will be coming out of hibernation.And Shane Watson's technique in test match could be tested if Poms pitch the ball in right areas.
On bowling front,apart from Mcgrath-Warne, back looks short of experience for the test level.
England needs to have self belief that they can conquer Aussies, else they would be doomed well before 23rd November.

I suspect Tim De Lisle felt under pressure to write a "Pro-Aussie" posting!

Fair play to Australia for winning (yet another!) ODI Tournament. However, in contrast to Mr De Lisle I'm not so sure they are firing on all cylinders.

Casting minds back to the last World Cup, I can't recall many occasions when they were in some trouble, as has happened in most of their Champions Trophy games this time round (even, briefly, against the Bangladesh of ODI cricket, England).

Last time's final was a case in point - Ponting and Martyn post a gargantuan total; McGrath knocks off Tendulkar in the first over of India's reply. Game over. No fuss, no wobbles.

Not any more.

The "old" McGrath would have seen off Chris Gayle himself, rather than relying on one of his young friends to do it for him. In fact, the "old" McGrath probably wouldn't have allowed Gayle (and Strauss before that) to take him for so many runs in the first place. The feeling remains that, had Bracken not bailed him out, Gayle would have merrily continued carting McGrath to all four corners for the remainder of his ten overs.

How does this relate to the Tests? Not much. The big question this winter will be England's form, and how their new players bed in. Australia are going in with basically the same team - does anyone think they've improved over the last eighteen months? Other than "Positive Spin" Ponting, of course. Of course not - with six over 35's and a probable 9 over 30's in the team, the best to be hoped for is they haven't gone backwards.

No, everyone will know what to expect from Australia. The burning issue will be whether England can raise their games again to match them. And, if they can, can "Dad's Army" (thanks Dennis Lillee...) maintain the intensity for five Tests in six weeks.

Tim, I'd love you to be wrong but fear you are right. Johnson worries me because it looks as though Australia have again found a reliable (and different, and dangerous) third seamer. Watson doesn't yet convince me, at least as a bowler, but if McGrath, Warne, Lee and Johnson do their job, England won't have an opportunity to exploit that weakeness.

Incidentally, and at the risk of going off topic, look at the photos of Panesar, Bell, Collingwood, Harmison and Flintoff on cricinfo this morning. You can almost smell their fear. I hope this photos are unrepresentative and team is remembering to relax and have a bit a fun, otherwise they will drain dry before the series even starts.

Australia will, I think win the ashes this year. Also I tend to back up Mrtyn with the issue of the "dad's army statement". This is pathetic, with age comes experiance, with experiance comes a team with the potential to beat any other in the world.

I think that Australia will win the ashes this year for two reasons:

1. Australia have players on form this year that didn't perform in England and Mcgrath should also be fit.

2. England have worries with people like Flintof and Threscothick, also new bowlers are coming into the England line up that are just not up to the job.

Tim's right, I think Australia will win the Ashes comfortably either 3-1 or 4-0. They have not been beaten at home since 1992/93. What cost Australia the Ashes last year was the poor quality of the seam bowling after McGrath got injured before the Edgbaston Test. Their seam bowling will be a lot better this time round. They have McGrath, Lee, Johnson, Watson (who can bat as well), Tait, Clark (who did well in SA earlier this year) and Bracken (who can swing the ball which may come in handy for the Gabba) to choose from, a genius leg-spinner in Warne and two decent spinners in MacGill and Cullen. If you look at their batting Ponting and Hussey are two of the best batsmen in the world and Martyn is in great form. They bowled very well in the Champions Trophy without Warne, they have 2-3 weeks to train before the Ashes so it's looking ominous for England. Australia will be desperate to get the Ashes back.
Looking at England, I was ashamed of the way they played in the Champions Trophy. They appeared disinterested at times. I have concerns about Fred's fitness and form. He hasn't scored a hundred nor has he taken 5 wickets in an innings I believe since last summer. The fast bowling is neither here nor there without Simon Jones. Harmy is wayward and inconsistent and in my view lacking in mental strength. Anderson is talented but hasn't played much Test cricket, Mahmood has potential but isn't exactly the finished article.
There are too many England players who go through the motions and lack intensity unlike the Aussies. There is too much tolerance of mediocrity. England are a good Test side who at times play very good cricket but they lack the consistency to become a truly great one. I don't think they've improved last summer whereas the Aussies have a lot. If you're an English fan prepare to suffer this summer!

As so many respondents pointed out in your last entry, this is more shameful anti-Australia bias, Mr de Lisle (if that is indeed your name). Setting us up for a fall by boosting our team, eh? Nice try, but we're on to you. And oh-so-subtly disrespecting our team by failing to address them by their full moniker "Commonwealth Bank Excited To Charge You For Your Overdraft Team Who Happen To Play Some Cricket Too"? For shame, Mr de Lisle. For shame.

For nearly 20 years, the Ashes meant fear for the English. As the Aussies fell about with smug self congratulation, the fear of humiliation for the English players was enough to lose us the series before it had begun. The only bright sparks were players who played without fear, Goughie in the 90s, Nasser in Birmingham and Vaughan last time round in Oz.

But now that fear has been exploded. Freddie and KP aren't complicated enought to be scared of anything, and their ebullience is enough to drive the more human characters in the English side. We might not win this time, but wait until 2009 and beyond...Warne, Gilchrist and McGrath are one offs...so enjoy them while you can Aussie.

Let's not forget Oz have to clearly win the series to get it back.

I believe that Trescothick is absolutely vital for England's success. If he gets going, he can change the balance of a game very very quickly.

If he struggles, the pressure will come onto the middle order very quickly.

But are you that convinced about Shane Watson's batting technique and bowling ability in test matches? From what I've seen (very little lately as we basically don't get free-to-air coverage of anything in Australia!) he seems to be a rather ordinary bowler and his batting technique seems dubious at best, especially against the spinners.

I know that he had good figure in The Champions Trophy, but there are many examples of limited overs 'legends' failing in the 5-day format (or indeed never being considered for tests at all).

Am I alone in this skepticism or has he truly developed as a cricketer enough to warrant selection in a series where marginal errors could provide windows of opportunity between two otherwise very close teams?

Tim is right - on current form, Australia should win comfortably. But one could have said exactly the same thing just before the 2005 Ashes. Indeed I remember thinking just before the last series that England's only hope would be if most of their players hit top form and stayed fit, while the Aussies suffered some form losses and injuries to key players. And funnily enough, that's pretty much exactly what happened. The odds the dice falling in England's favour again seem rather long, but one never knows. On the other hand, if Flintoff gets injured and Harmison's form doesn't improve, 5-0 to Australia wouldn't be out of the question either.

For those wondering about Watson, according to Ponting, he wont be picked unless the four front line bowlers cant get their act together. He'll be alright for the Aussies in a while, but CA knows what some of the posters here know, he's not completely there yet. Again, this may prove to be the weak link in the Australian line up. If Flintoff can be two players in one again, the Aussies will be in for a tough, but quite winnable, series.

Tim

On current form the Aussies will win the world cup!! But thats a ODI competition, not a Test.

The squads all change and many of the form players will not be in the test squad for Oz!! Or lets hope they do, Watson open the batting? Thats one wicket for Hoggard in over one, Tap Langer on the helmet then fire in another, two down over two!! Then Ponting comes in he's really in form (how many runs in Champs Trophy??) thats three down and Harmy on fire. In steps Martyn (Great OD form try that and..........!!). Hadn't mentioned Hayden, gets Yipps (or was it Yapps!!) ankle injury flairs up rabies expected and gives the charge to trusty Hoggard, now 4 or 5 in first 10 overs!!

Come on lets get serious!! Oz are favourites have been for years, but they have lost some of the sparkle and snap. England have more backbone than before and also more to prove.

It's going to be an interesting contest, with, I think, surprising performances from some of the junior England players.

I hope Panesar plays, Mahmood can keep his line (or Anderson can!!) and that Tresco has found his "Zone" again (all credit to him!!). Oh and that Bell can shove McGraths words down his throat!!

All That means a drawn series and England retain ashes (by skin of teeth!) and Aussie selectors will struggle for a credible team come next rematch in UK!!

Tim's right, Australia should win the Ashes. However, if England can take the attack to us, we might be run close- remember Bangladesh? Jon Hames is also right- Shane Watson is a bit overrated, not as good as players like Bravo, or even as good as Sean Ervine or anyone who bowl considerably slower than him. Last year he was complete cannon fodder during the Tests, despite decent ODI form. Best bet- have Gilchrist at 6, and play MacGill and either Clark or Johnson (preferably Clark).

I am just sitting back in awe of the analytical ability of Mr. de Lisle. Or, more accurately, his lack thereof.

Can't Wisden find someone, anyone, capable of authoring a meaningful Ashes blog?!?

Being an aussie it is almost heretical to say this but I reckon the Poms can do us.

If you look at the form of the two sides you will say at a glance the Aussies have regained what they had lost. But if you look further Ponting and Hussey carried the batting last season none of the others incumbents or fringe players could make a run.

I don't think the techniques of the Aussie batsmen can effectively counter, Flintoff, Harmison and co. A pre cursor to what could happen this season was shown last year in the International Test in Sydney where we suffered a big batting collapse at the hands of Flintoff and Harmison.

Our saving grace is that I don't think the Pommy bats are any better. So if McGrath can avoid any mishaps we should be able to bowl them out for smaller totals than we will make.

Go Aussies!

There seems to be a lot of England fans writing off their own team on this blog. I don't know if it's a bit of false modesty or what, but if all of you are correct about Englands chances this summer then I don't think England have got any choice but to go all out with attack, youth and the unexpected. Choosing Flintoff as captain was a great move as a start, and, though I've only seen a little bit off him, Monty Panesar seems like he's worth a real shot. I think if England play to their potential then they can not just draw, but actually win, and win more comfortably than many people think. Having said that for England to win would probably require Australia to have a few more of those career-ending form slumps and injuries that happened to Gillespe and McGrath last year.
Just on what Jon Harmes has posted, I think your right to be skeptical about Watson's ability, but it's the Aussie way to put the promising cricketers in at the deep end and give them a fair go. The ashes is as good a place to start as any. But the one I've really been impressed with lately is Bracken. I don't know - is it worth the risk of going with 4 seamers, warne and just the five batsmen and Gilly? Of course, the selectors would never have the guts, and they so desperatly want a genuine allrounder like Watson.
To Mr 89notout, come on mate, I think your're being a bit disngenuous with your comments there. England didn't loose the Ashes for 20 years because they were afraid, they lost because the opposition was better(both in skill and metally), just as England were a better side last year. The difference this time is that both sides have the personal to win, and unlike last year (where the Aussies may have been a little complacent) I think both sides are hungry too. I basically agree with Dean Jones when he said that if England are going to win the fast bowlers, Harmison, Hoggard and Flitoff all have to fire, with the spinner(s) giving solid, tight support.

If England go in with five bowlers - and it looks like we are - then surely the Aussies can use Warne as an all-rounder? I don't think this is as daft as it seems - he batted wonderfully well at times last summer. That would allow another specialist quick bowler to be picked, increasing the variety available and keeping McGrath fresh. Personally, I hope the Aussies pick Watson, as I can't see him causing England much trouble. An attack containing McGrath, Warne, Lee, Bracken AND one of the tyro quicks (who would also be under less pressure to take wickets and be economical, which did for Tait and Kasper last summer) is far more terrifying to me than one with Watson coming in second change to bowl long hops at our middle order.

What form? Australia haven't played test cricket for months and while they were sporadically impressive in winning the Champions Trophy there will be significant changes of personnel for the Ashes series. McGrath has proven that he is capable of bowling short spells with several days of rest in between, no more, and lest we forget he has bowled some pretty ordinary stuff in a number of his first spells - we will know if he is back or not when he is still bowling in his thirtieth over on the second or third day of a test. Gilchrist, big hundred against Bangladesh aside, has continued his poor form since the Ashes, Hayden has only scored one test hundred in 2006 and Johnson, Bracken, Watson etc. are all unproven at this level. Lest we forget Damien Martyn was in great form and generally held to be one fo the world's top batsmen before the last series as well. England were disappointing in Pakistan and against Sri Lanka but have also drawn in India (currently a much tougher task than the series against West Indies and South Africa that Australia have played) and comfortably beaten Pakistan.
Australia may well win the Ashes this time round - they still have a fine side with potential match winners but many of the comments coming out of Australia suggest that their senior players, with the notable exception of Shane Warne, have not taken on board the lessons of 2005 and the word hubris springs to mind.
What is so exciting avbout this series is that I have absolutely no idea what might happen. Bring it on!

Mr Fairweather writes a lot of sense, but 4 years ago Vaughan's comment on his batting success down under was that 'he wasn't going to die wondering'. Yes, he has the talent, but it was this realisation that he had to go at the Aussies 100% was actually the key to England winning last year. Put simply, they went hell for leather - with no fear. In KP's recent autobiography he repeatedly states he's not afraid of failing, i.e. getting out. The English team needed to realise the Aussies weren't invincible, and that happened collectively for the first time last year - think of KP's counterattacking innings on the last day at the Oval - an innings I am proud to say I saw live.

The Aussies have established a bullying style of attacking cricket that has transformed the game, and personally, I'll shed a tear or two when Warney retires...but the thing about bullies, is that there's always someone bigger and harder around the corner.

"But when you find yourself viewing the return of Warne as a plus, you know you’re clutching at straws"

Are you kidding? Are you?
Even at 35, Warne is still the best legspinner - if not the best spinner - in the world. He will be, by far, the best of the spinners we will see at the Ashes.
The Pombatsmen aren't necessarily excellent players of spin-bowling, let alone high-quality leg spin which is what Warne bowls. This is said with the exception of occassional brilliance by Pietersen or Flintoff when playing a spinner.
The return of Warne is not a plus, it's a plus-plus. He, I believe, will be a matchwinner for Australia in more than one test in the upcoming series.

The return of Warne a plus...in any sense? What???

Anyway, back to reality - I, like Gordon, fear a drubbing. Who wouldn't given the diametrically opposed recent results for each team, albeit in a different form of the game. But who *didn't?* fear a drubbing after the Lords test last summer? Even a first day score 407 at Edgbaston was dismissed as below par until England's quartet of seamers spent the next two days camped in the corridor of (pretty rapid) uncertainty and the whole series turned on it's head. Of course the aussies start as massive favourites. And yes, it will take the same combination of luck/umpiring decisions going our way and similarly monumental performances from expected (Fred, KP etc) and less expected (S.Jones, Giles) quarters that we experienced in 2005 for us to give a good account of ourselves. But the one thing we must cling to is that our players *do* have ability...and have displayed it throughout a trying, yet fascinating year of post-ashes test cricket. Bell and Strauss have the stage, temperament, and most importantly, form to cement themselves as top-of-the-pile test match batsmen; and in Monty we finally have a spinner that can contain on a featherbed AND bowl a team out given runs on the board and a hint of juice in the surface. What better chance for Mahmood to announce himself on the world stage by emulating Jones's immaculate swing bowling and vital lower order runs of 2005? Then there is the 'wow' factor if our big guns fire. As for the Aussies - well I don't need to say a word. We know what we're gonna get - quality and depth in every department. England of course are the classic 'unknown' quantity - a question of which England turns up on the day. But until we do know, we musn't give up hope!
I for one cannot wait for it to pan out...although it will be with a degree of trepidation that I march to the TV at 6 o'clock on those cold, dark winter weekday mornings...

Bring it on!

It was great for cricket that England won back the ashes, because English Ashes misery will continue for another decade. This series is the last for the old gaurd with the future being with the likes of Hussey, Lee, Ponting, Tait, Johnson, Jauques, Cosgrove, Watson, Nofke, Bracken and so many more. This series will be a sentimantal farewell to wonderful players from a wonderful era; they will bond together and bow out holding the ashes in a fitting farewell.

Australia will demolish england look at the squads and the forms of the two since the Ashes Australia has domiated everything in its path while England's form has been back to it's usual. I think Australia will win quite easily but for viewing sake i hope england perform well but 3-1 looks the best bet