England / Frank Gregan / 13 September 2010 /

Frank Gregan considers England's chances of success Down Under and explains why the selectors have a big role to play if Andrew Strauss and co. are to return home with the urn.

The England selectors have shown a bit of bottle of late which might just shake one or two of the more established players out of their comfort zones. The decisions to 'rest' an out of form Kevin Pietersen will be a wake up call to those who thought their places were secure as will tinkering with the opening partnership which won the Twenty20 World Cup.

The selectors will have been delighted with how the first ODI against Pakistan panned out with the two players asked to fill some very big shoes producing match winning performances. Jonathan Trott played the anchor from KP's number three spot with Steve Davies top scoring 87 and holding his own with the wicket keeping gloves. Next year is a World Cup year and, having tasted success when lifting their first ever World Cup trophy during this year's Twenty20, all of the players will be desperate to be a part of it.

ODI and Test selections have very little in common. ODI selections are often bold with experimentation allowed whilst Test match selection is usually more conservative than Margaret Thatcher. Invariably, changes to Test match teams are reactive rather than proactive and when the change is made it tends to be singular and like for like. The media will not be slow to give advice to the selectors in the run up to the Ashes and all the usual management clichés will be wheeled out.

The selectors need to listen to the advisor they are paying to advise and make sure that they pick a team that will be effective at each venue. John Buchanan's input will be invaluable but the chances are that the selectors will not like what he tells them. They have to be brave, proactive and, to quote a corny management statement, they have to exercise control before the event.

When you look at it objectively the solution is simple - the 11 players picked must be capable of getting at least one big total and taking 20 wickets in five days. The number six spot is the one that is up for grabs - should it be Eoin Morgan or Ian Bell? If England are going to post big totals they need all the fire power they can muster, so why not both? Seven batsmen and four bowlers is a fairly common composition, it just means one of the batsmen has to be able to keep wicket. With the likes of Craig Kieswetter and Steve Davies around that shouldn't be a problem.

The bowlers are there to bowl the Australians out twice, that's their job. However, if two or three of them can also bat a bit, that's brilliant. Both Graeme Swann and Stuart Broad are capable with the willow and with both in the side along with seven batsman it will be a very deep batting line-up. But those 20 wickets have to be taken and if numbers 10 and 11 have big furry ears, buck teeth, love lettuce and say "what's up Doc" who cares? Just so long as they can get a five for!

The selectors need to take note of a final corny management saying: 'People are our greatest asset.' The 11 people they select for the opening Test have to be the right ones. If they are advised the ball won't swing they have to be brave and go without James Anderson. If they are told the track will be a batsmen's paradise they have to make sure they have seven in the top order to get a big total. The Ashes series won't be won around the selection table but it could be lost there.

Five massive totals would mean at worst five draws which would be enough to keep the Ashes. If you want a drawn series on your side, a match at [2.3] should be attainable on England retaining the little urn.

'.$sign_up['title'].'

'; } } ?>

:

:

:

?

: