The Eve of the Ashes

Here we go.

00:00 GMT, November 23rd, 2006 it all kicks off. And, unlike last summer's abortive attempt, this year I'm going to try and blog every day for the duration of the series - certainly every day there's play. We'll see how it goes.

A few last minute scares for England - Bell getting cracked on the wrist by Anderson had everyone's hearts in their mouths, but he does seem to be fit, and will be batting at 3 after Cook and Strauss. Let's hope his performance there against South Australia carries on, rather than the dismal showing last summer - you felt for him watching some of the post Ashes interviews, clearly conscious he hadn't contributed with the bat.

Then of course there's the three big choices: Anderson or Mahmood? Jones or Read? and Panesar or Giles?

The easy one to dismiss is the 'keeper. Like it or lump it, it's Jones. My view on this is that it paves the way for a slightly longer tail, if that's what Fletcher's worried about: Read is, without a doubt, the better keeper, and I personally don't think the batting is as clear-cut as Fletcher does, but the decision's made, for better or for worse.

On to the quicks: Mahmood or Anderson? Both of them suffer from radar issues early on - if it goes wrong for them, it does tend to quite dramatically pearshaped, unlike, say, Hoggy, who can pull himself back after a couple of dud balls. I plump for Anderson, mostly because, on his day, he can produce truly unplayable deliveries (as Yousouf Youhana can attest from the '03 World Cup), and if he gets the line and length right he can tie an end down (Australia themselves can attest to this, with a performance against them of something like 10-4-0-12, if I remember rightly. Admittedly that was in a one-dayer.). He does, I think, have self-belief issues, but I think Fletcher and Flintoff can motivate him for this one. Mahmood may be quicker, but my money's on Anderson for pulling out the magic. The only justification for Mahmood I can see is that on present form with the bat, he does shorten the tail.

And then the toughie. Monty or Gilo? You could probably fill a complete issue of the Telegraph with the column inches that have been expended on this one. Two spinners, alike in... actually, the fact they're both left arm orthodox, and would run through a brick wall for England. Otherwise, on the one hand, you have Monty, the youthful, aggressive, patka-wearing Sikh, blessed with prodigious amounts of talent and turn, last to leave the practice ground, legendary (and not in a good way), fielder, boyish love for the game evident every time he takes a wicket, the man in possession. And Gilo, grizzled veteran (and one of the few left) of the darker days of England's Test history, dour, defensive, doesn't turn it as much, solid number 8, unsung fielding hero with an arm several Aussies learned about the hard way, the previous incumbent, just back from a long layoff.

On paper, looking at that, there's not much contest, at least in my view. It should be Panesar, purely and simply because we want to win, to go out there and seize the First Test by the scruff, and Monty adds another string to our bow. Fletcher, though, is expected to incline towards Giles, for the batting alone. One could, though, make the point that Monty never gets the chance, stuck down at number 11 with lesser lights like Harmison ahead of him, and that he could pick Mahmood to shorten the tail if he wanted. And Fletcher did pick Panesar for the last warmup game. Who knows?

My preferred England lineup?: Strauss, Cook, Bell, Pietersen, Flintoff, Collingwood, Jones, Harmison, Hoggard, Anderson, Panesar. Seven players who saw Ashes action in 2005. I have a gut feeling we'll see Giles, though.