Beoz

Looks like Matt Prior is in the house.

It doesn't matter which batter they drop. You can pick 1, 2 or 3 and it won't make a lick of difference to any result. Its all about the bowlers. All the bowlers need to do is bowl line and length like they did in the first innings and for that short period post lunch in the second innings when England collapsed.

mikemike

they are going to select Matt Prior? well it may be their best option

mikelincs

I see Specsavers (England cricket sponsors) have offered Jack Lech free glasses for life after he kept his wicket intact so Stokes could win the match.

Beoz

Contacts would be safer.

Beoz

Only if they wanted to select a player who has a history of being "scared".

Amazulu

It's not yet certain that Anderson is fit and Australia still have Starc up their sleeve. Archer may well prove to be the next great white hope, but as England have just found out, ability in the other forms of non-cricket (ODIs and T20s) does not necessarily mean test success - test cricket is the only version of cricket, the others are games. Anyway, they are both, average 2nd string test nations at the moment with middling test rankings. But it's the Ashes, where cricket began and it's exciting and worth a watch

I'm sticking with scarred only

Beoz

Starc... now there's a change that could be considered. I would be tempted to contemplate a 4th quick (wicket depending).

In recent history Australia's tail end have contributed as many runs as the batters ...... so no batting loss there.

And it might save the selectors from doing something really stupid like picking Mitch Marsh.

Anyhow, no drastic changes needed. Losing by one wicket after losing the toss and bowling in batting perfect conditions is no great shakes, given where Australia were a year ago they should be 3 nil down by now.

Amazulu

Anderson out:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/49527522

Time for plan C

Beoz

On the brightside, it makes the job easier for the selectors. Anderson would have been a certainty. So who would you drop? Woakes or Archer?

Amazulu

A tough one. Woakes, although a 2nd string bowler is a genuine test player. Archer, although he is showing some signs, has yet to prove that he is. Anderson has been one of the best test fast bowlers this century - able to bowl consistent line and length for long spells - and take wickets. He is hard to replace but I'd probably go with Archer given his pace, which will probably worry Smith

Beoz

I recall when Jimmy came on the scene. He was a bit slow and was mainly on the ODI scene. However that certainly changed. His pace improved and was able to swing it both ways in the right conditions and always on the money. Unplayable in the right conditions.

I would go with Archer because of his stats so far. He dropped some pace in the 3rd test but I think that had more to do with giving the ball more air time.

DeadVim

mikemike

IF JA was still around ....get rdical

drop jason roy, promote bairstow, he has opened in long form

Now JA looks pretty much retired even if he does nt want toe it will be unchanged.

I would not be dropping Archer, he has done nothing wrong, and Steve Smith is going to have a niggle of a doubt against him, that the others do not induce..

DeadVim

Beoz

What I love about the Ashes in England is the series is never a done deal (this century anyway) until the fat lady sings, but the above, really, wrong on so many levels.