Three horse race to be the best team in the world?

[honestbharani]

In Indian conditions? I really doubt it. They've got awesome back up strength in their bowling attack - that's the biggest improvement in England I've seen. Not sure how that is going to help England win a test match in India, when the entire bowling attack is going to be on it's first tour to India, except Anderson - I concede he is a world class performer capable of taking wickets anywhere. But besides him, whether Sehwag, Gambhir, Dravid, Tendulkar, Laxman line up to Broad or Tremlett is a moot point.




These instances are really aberrations considering the fact that India has lost just 4 tests in 7 years.

I've always been wary of mercurial talents like Flintoff and Steyn (not so mercurial, but great like Marshall and Hadlee), and the occasional screw ups of our local associations to prepare green tops in order to proclaim their supremacy over BCCI. If one of the above happens, okay. But besides that I just don't see England dismissing Sehwag, Gambhir, Dravid, Tendulkar, Laxman, Dhoni, and someone else twice.

I would be the first one to admit that the Indian team has a lot of glaring failings, but for England defeating India in India is still a bridge too far - even in a test match.

I won't be that confident.. I am not saying England will win on their own, but we are very much capable of shooting ourselves on the foot, like going in with little preparation. Watch us march into a test series after 3894729 ODIs against SL in SL and watch England play 5 practice games all over India and come in all prepared and hurl us over...


Wish the BCCI would realize the importance of time between games.. I won't mind if the entire first choice test side don't play the last 3 or 4 ODIs of some random series... Get them fit for the tests, FFS..

 

[honestbharani]

Me!

lol.. juz replied to you

 

[honestbharani]

Kumble just ensured that no one got a sniff, but even without him - as long as the present batting line up is around - India are unbeatable at home.

I am yet to hear of how England or any bowling attack in the world not including Steyn can bowl out Sehwag, Gambhir, Dravid, Tendulkar, Laxman, Dhoni, a 6th batsman, and a useful tail twice on Indian tracks?

But what is the guarantee that these gentlemen will line up for us when England finally tour India? Trust me, you are starting to give me a weird feeling of rooting for England all of a sudden..

 

[Hit Wicket]

But what is the guarantee that these gentlemen will line up for us when England finally tour India? Trust me, you are starting to give me a weird feeling of rooting for England all of a sudden..

Well, of course the entire discussion is hypothetical in that sense and perpetuated by someone's comment that if England were to tour India at the time of the the World Cup. We don't even know the next FTP, so making a realistic guess of what teams would face off next time England tours India is moot/

 

[Dissector]

I'm not going to look up the stats, but can safely tell you that England took 20 wickets in Perth and lost.

OK. Make it taking 20 wickets seven times and six wins out of 14 games.

 

[vcs]

But what is the guarantee that these gentlemen will line up for us when England finally tour India? Trust me, you are starting to give me a weird feeling of rooting for England all of a sudden..

Dude!

 

[Teja.]

I really hope India wins 4-0, Tremlett takes 30 wickets @ 17, Broad has one five-fer and Trott scores 3 centuries.

 

[Spark]

I can't see England being dominant. To be dominant you need to be more than just expertly drillled and coached, which England are, but you need more than that.

I really hope India wins 4-0, Tremlett takes 30 wickets @ 17, Broad has one five-fer and Trott scores 3 centuries.

Those are gonna be some freak games India win 4-0 whilst Tremlett takes 30 wickets in four tests for not very many runs.

FWIW I reckon England will be a real handful. Tremlett obviously is an excellent bowler and could well bowl like McGrath did, and hence cause problems. But Anderson has proven in this series that he is just as good with the reversing ball as the conventionally swinging one. On slow, dry decks Broad could be the real wildcard with his cutters though. Swann I suspect will do OK without being brilliant or dire.

 

[Teja.]

I can't see England being dominant. To be dominant you need to be more than just expertly drillled and coached, which England are, but you need more than that.

Those are gonna be some freak games India win 4-0 whilst Tremlett takes 30 wickets in four tests for not very many runs.

FWIW I reckon England will be a real handful. Tremlett obviously is an excellent bowler and could well bowl like McGrath did, and hence cause problems. But Anderson has proven in this series that he is just as good with the reversing ball as the conventionally swinging one. On slow, dry decks Broad could be the real wildcard with his cutters though. Swann I suspect will do OK without being brilliant or dire.

Haha, was fantasizing tbh. England either to win 3-1 or 2-1 with one draw coming out of a game where England were the better side.

I'm talking about the series coming up btw.

 

[GotSpin]

I just want to see some great cricket...right guys????

 

[GIMH]

BTW some interesting stats. Over the last one and a half years, India has played 13 tests against top 5 sides: SA, Australia and SL. They have taken 20 wickets 8 times, with 7 wins. Over that same period, England has played 14 tests against SA and Australia and their much vaunted bowling lineup has taken 20 wickets, 6 times with 6 wins.

How many times were India away? England were away for nine of those games but managed to fit in four innnings victories.

lol.. Z, you are yet to see some of the hubris sprouted around by a couple of English fans in the thread about what Gough said.. That would be the context for the hubris shown by some of the Indian fans here.


BTW, who exactly in CW have been saying England can't win a test in India.. Juz out of curiousity...

Lol hb....but miss, they started it!

 

[kingjulian]

How many times were India away? England were away for nine of those games but managed to fit in four innnings victories.

How the **** is this a relevant question? Please do explain...

 

[GIMH]

Because teams perform better at home than away. So if all those times India took twenty wickets were at home, it's hardly a fair comparison. Not ****ing rocket science.

 

[Furball]

BTW some interesting stats. Over the last one and a half years, India has played 13 tests against top 5 sides: SA, Australia and SL. They have taken 20 wickets 8 times, with 7 wins. Over that same period, England has played 14 tests against SA and Australia and their much vaunted bowling lineup has taken 20 wickets, 6 times with 6 wins.

We took 20 wickets at Perth and lost, so your stats aren't correct.

 

[Furball]

Because teams perform better at home than away. So if all those times India took twenty wickets were at home, it's hardly a fair comparison. Not ****ing rocket science.

But Indian pitches are flat!

Notice how they're not including games against Sri Lanka, which is a bit unfair given they've been ranked ahead of Australia for about a year.

 

[GIMH]

Nah, tbf Sri Lanka games are included as far as I can see

 

[Howe_zat]

We took 20 wickets at Perth and lost, so your stats aren't correct.

Not sure how he missed that.

Here's the innings by innings* list of Ind, Eng and SA bowlers against top 5 sides in the last 18 months.

Team records | Test matches | Cricinfo Statsguru | ESPN Cricinfo

I notice that 6 of the top 10 conceded are from India, but all the lowest declarations are against England, showing their batting weaknesses. (aside from that ridiculous match where SL declared on 129/3)

*a/o or dec only

 

[marc71178]

In Indian conditions? I really doubt it. They've got awesome back up strength in their bowling attack - that's the biggest improvement in England I've seen. Not sure how that is going to help England win a test match in India, when the entire bowling attack is going to be on it's first tour to India, except Anderson - I concede he is a world class performer capable of taking wickets anywhere. But besides him, whether Sehwag, Gambhir, Dravid, Tendulkar, Laxman line up to Broad or Tremlett is a moot point.

So Swann's tour of India didn't happen then?

And Monty didn't play either?

As for the Indian batting strength - how do we know they'll still be there come the next England tour?

The England team that played 2 Tests in 2008 IIRC acquitted themselves very well and it was only a freak performance that stopped them from getting a draw at worst in the series.

 

[marc71178]

I am still not convinced about the English batsmen's ability to play spin too still,tbh.

South Africa have Kallis,Amla and AB who are their best players of spin and as have been reliant on them in India to a large extent while Australia did not have someone so like that so they struggled.

Playing Harbhajan in India out of the rough is a different proposition altogether ,even different from playing spin in Bangladesh or Srilanka.

So when you factor in Swann and Harbhajan ,you also have to see the batting lineups they are bowling too.

So basically, if Harbhajan gets better figures than Swann in the upcoming series you won't use that as a stick to beat Swann with then?

Pull the other one.

 

[zaremba]

I already acknowledged special players like Flintoff, Steyn can win tests in India. Problem is England don't have any.

What nonsense. A good all-round team will always tend to do better, not worse, than an average team with a stand-out player. But hey, who am I to prick your marvellous bubble of pride. You have faith in your team, good for you.