So, the Ashes are done and the Poms are grinning and doing whatever they feel like – I see their dry pitches are getting a better watering! Now we turn our minds to the first test in Brisbane and who we reckon should be picked.

I believe a batsman shouldn’t even be considered unless they’re at least a 40 averager in First Class cricket. This MUST be a basis of selection because if you can't do it in First Class cricket then it just won't happen at Test level. Surely Ed Cowan is proof of this.
People keep suggesting Callum Ferguson and I just don't get it. Averaging 36 over 72
matches with only 8 centuries while playing home games at Adelaide! Hmmm – I can’t see Ferguson being the solution. It seems barely good enough to keep him in the Shield team!
I'm not sold on Warner anymore either. Most of his best efforts have been against weaker attacks - NZ and India in Australia for example. His lack of technique will nearly always fail him against good bowling on a wicket doing a bit. That's what I reckon.

I'm thinking that young Jordan Silk should be told to concentrate on FC cricket and ignore the short form stuff.  Rogers can teach a proper, young test opener while he's still around. Or we bite the bullet and say to Sam Robson you're in and save him from the England selector’s clutches. If he's done well at county cricket, which seems as good as or better now than Shield, then why not just say you're in the Aussie team mate? He knows these English bowlers remember!
Also, Starc is a bit hit and miss for me. Patto straight in for him when fit.
Faulkner went well in the 5^th Test. The thing with him is, he has to be either
picked as a top 4 bowler or be good enough to bat at no.6. He took wickets
once it became a one day type of game in the test match. He's a great short
form operator and has the mentality for tests BUT his role is unclear at
test level.
So I'd like to see Rogers, Silk/Robson, Watson, Clarke, Smith, Dan Brodman,
Haddin, Siddle, Harris, Patto, Lyon.

Yep … you read correctly, Our Dan at number 6. Australia need him!

I certainly spend a lot of DAYS being happy, I haven't ever felt I wanted to be happy for a WEEK but a LIFETIME I think I could handle.

French Cricket Rules

The rules of French cricket seem to vary a bit, but here are the official rules as used by the French Association de Cricket Tournament (FACT) for the series against the touring Australian D team captained by Nathan Snoreritz.

• The game requires 8 players per team. No stumps or pitch are required. 
• There is one batsman at a time with 8 fieldsmen
• The first batsman makes a stance with the bat held vertically in front of the legs, while standing within a 20m radius circle.
• The fieldsmen try to throw the ball and hit the batsman's legs below the knees. This area is known as the “stumps”. Any bowling/throwing action is OK.
• If the batsman hits the ball, they are able to move to another position (further away from the ball), but must stop and take up the batting stance when the ball is picked up. If the batsman fails to hit the ball and it passes by, the batsman cannot turn around to face another bowler. Instead the batsman must twist and turn to try to defend the stumps without moving his feet.
• The batsman is out if he hits the ball and it is caught by one of the fieldsmen or if the ball hits his "stumps" - the legs below the knee.
• Scores are made by hitting either a Quatre (4) or a Six (6). There is no running. 
• Each batsman has one innings and there is no limit to the number of deliveries a batsman can face.
• Scores are totaled for an aggregate team score with the highest team score winning.
• The game goes for a maximum of three two hour sessions over one day. A team may choose to bat for the whole day therefore ensuring a draw.

Dunno about Spurs'  new coaching methods … I hope they don't try this bloke in the AFL or NRL!

I'm confused ... so when is Septemberfest on then?

Blain Brodman here …
Woke up this morning to the nightmare news (as an Aussie supporter) - I went to bed at 2-167. 

I'm a traditionalist and have my concerns about the effect Twenty20 is having on Test cricket. It's not just all about technique, it's also about temperament, concentration and patience and the willingness and ability to adjust your game. All of those skills don't seem apparent in most young batsmen. Joe Shag, er, Root, is trying for England, but he goes from one extreme to the next as far as shot-making goes. The only batsmen in the Aussie team with these skills are Clarke and Rogers. While England have four in Bell, Trott, Cook and Pietersen. Although, I've got to say I see KP is letting his own ego get him out too often. 

Cook and Trott are both just having a bad series and that happens, although you have to give the Aussie new-ball bowling credit where it's due and Harris in particular has been world class. Rogers has shown that he should have been playing Test cricket for at least the last five years since Langer, then Hayden, retired.  

The Aussie team has been equal to England in the bowling but not in the top-six batting. England has always had someone fire when needed for a big innings – Bell especially, who just has to be player of the series, I reckon. If Bell had been playing for us then it would have been victory to Australia. He has been the major difference, along with Swann's ability to take crucial wickets when needed.  

Overall, the batting in this Ashes series has been utterly @&#$! – with only three players averaging over 40 so far: Bell (71), Clarke (49) and Rogers (43). That's pretty woeful stuff and the pitches haven't been bad at all. Two Tests have produces results on the 5th day and Manchester would have been the same without rain/"bad" light. There's been a bit for seamers and spinners and, as Bell has shown, centuries for the taking if your technique and mental ability are good enough. 

Bresnan's batting is masking his bowling deficiency. He's a good fourth seamer (like Watson) but not a number-three bowler. England should play Tremlett ahead of him in the fifth Test, getting ready for Australia where the Poms won't get pitches dished up for Swann. Hopefully, they'll be tailored to our fast-bowling strength! I reckon Tremlett is the man for England in Aust to pair with Anderson/possibly Finn. 

If I were an English fan I'd find Broad frustratingly inconsistent. He's feast or famine – always has been. He should play as the third seamer/bowling allrounder – no room for Bresnan in the same role! Hopefully the English selectors won't agree.

A team's top-four bowlers have to live by their ability to take wickets at a good rate (at least 3.5 wickets a Test) and a below-30 average. Tremlett fits that bill big time. Bresnan doesn't and Broad just. Drop Bairstow – he isn't up to it and will not do well in Australia. Keep Root, but maybe down the order and bring in Compton. 

Now, Australia! Hmm … for the next Test I'd probably swap Hughes for Khawaja, and Faulkner for Watson assuming he's out injured. Bird bowled OK without a lot of luck – give him another run. Pick and stick with Lyon, he had a good Test. This may leave a perceived batting weakness but I believe Faulkner can bat at 6 or 7 and Haddin at 6 or 7 for this last Test. Cowan is a shield/county cricketer –  he's had his dash, no run for him. Starc – unlucky. Again.

Austraila have bounced back well in the last Two tests and, provided they continue in the fifth, they give us all hope that there is a base to work with. The bowling depth looks good and getting the batting selections and order right will at least help. 

What would help most of all of course, is if the selectors get my son Dan over to England straight away instead of having him waste his time flaying the French for the Australia D team.
That's my two or three bob's worth.

While Dan was flaying 'em round le park in the French Cricket Test for Aussie D against CC de Paris, I took the opportunity to whip over to London for a pint or two. I saw this gem during my travels – cacked myself.