1st Test:
not to mention a catalogue of poor umpiring decisions and a collapse in first test bowling and batting...
hope that last bit is scarcasm...
Oh they were definitely competitive against Australia- i wouldn't ever say otherwise, that series was extremely promising for the Windies. But i mean regarding this series, whether i expect WI to be competitive depends on how you define that. Personally i can't see them winning the series. England are a much better side and four tests is a long time to overperform for. At best they'll scrape a 1-1 draw or 2-1 loss and put up a good fight like they did in SA not long ago.
Third best? Sarwan?
Would imagine he's referring to Gayle after recent NZ, not much swing in Windies so I would bank on Gayle having quite a good series, third batsmen might just be pushing it but he's there or there abouts despite average.
Yeah sure I'll take that. Two weeks.
Sarwan>Gayle IMO. It's hard to choose much between any of those batsmen after Chanderpaul (best batsman in the world) and KP (awesome). Strauss, Cook, Gayle, Sarwan, Collingwood, Bell-end- they're all 40-ish averaging players, and if you asked 5 different people to rank them you'd probably get five different orders. Personally I'd go:
Hmm when was the last time he scored a test century in the West Indies?
was the 300 against Seth Efrica, they kept saying when it was in the NZ series but I forgot, at least 2 years ago, but atm I think he's found form and is a player England will have to be extremely weary of, especially if players like Anderson and Broad dont turn up. I reckon right now Gayle=Sarwan, Sarwan needs to find a bit of form and fluency, if he gets that then he'll be one of the best batsmen on show.
It was four years ago apparently. April 2005.
Hmm.
Taylor and Edwards are very good bowlers while they both started their careers very poorly its hard to knock how well they've bowled since 2008 (Edwards 31 @ 29.35, Taylor 27 @ 32.92, Bravo 20 @ 36.60) unfortunately this is where things get dire for the West Indies. They have some very good players in Gayle, Sarwan, Nash, Chanderpaul, Bravo, Taylor and Edwards but after that there just seems to be gaping void in the talent pool. Marshall is okay I suppose.
Harmison's definitely better than Broad and Bravo. I'm not a Harmison fan but he's definitely better than those two. Taylor's better than Edwards too IMO. Ranking the fast bowlers I'd go:
Na Edwards has gotten pretty quick and surprisingly accurate and I rate him a little above Taylor in the longer form of the game. Also would be partial to rating them both above Anderson.
Anderson's a tricky one because if the ball swings at any stage the WI are gone.
I don't expect them to win the series. But the initial suggestion was that without Fliintoff and Pietersen, West Indies could be competitive. I believe West Indies can be competitive against England's strongest lineup. Whether they will be or not is another story.
Thankfully it's unlikely to swing enough and for long enough for Anderson to do that kind of damage.
There was one test last summer- the second vs. Sri Lanka i believe- where the ball swung round corners for about 10 of the 15 sessions. The other time i remember it looping wildly in the Caribbean was St Paddy's day 2007, otherwise known as the Greatest Day in the History of Cricket.