*Official* - Road to India in England 2011

[Bun]

Tremlett's a far better test bowler than Sreesanth. More accurate plus steeper bounce. There's really no argument. Tremlett outbowled him hands down 4 years ago and is much improved since. Sree's at best plateaued

I doubt many would take Sharma over Broad either.

sreE has bowled india to wins in sa twice. Had he been that gud 4 yrs bak why has he playd so few

 

[hang on]

injuries and a corresponding loss of form, confidence etc. is the reason why tremlett hasn't played too much after 07.

that said, sreesanth, when he gets it to all come together, can be devastating. he has had a couple of such match turning spells in the past couple of years, i think. one against the lankans and the other quite recently against the saffers.

 

[Teja.]

injuries and a corresponding loss of form, confidence etc. is the reason why tremlett hasn't played too much after 07.

that said, sreesanth, when he gets it to all come together, can be devastating. he has had a couple of such match turning spells in the past couple of years, i think. one against the lankans and the other quite recently against the saffers.

Yeah, Dont think anyone will deny Sree is capable of bowling a match-turning spell much like Broad in SA and Ashes 09. However Tremlett whenever he has played tests has always been absolutely top notch, was fearsome in the recent Ashes too. Has a Macca-sque style about him and will be extremely hard to handle in any pitch with movement and bounce, though he has proved to be effective in pitches without that much bounce due to his accuracy too. He's in a completely different class as a longer format bowler to Sreesanth IMO.

Makes one wonder if Bun watched any of Tremlett's 6 tests. Bowled some ridiculously good spells. Tipping him to be England's best bowler for the next 3 years.

 

[mono]

Tremlett is far better than Sree on average. When sree gets things right he's quite lethal but more often than not he does not get things right & allows for him emotions to get the better of him.

 

[Furball]

No, while being dominant increases your chances of winning series, it isn't the only criteria to make you win em. See Ashes 2009 for example. Australia iirc dominated Eng in the batting charts, but didn't make it.

The difference with this indian team is, they can be dominant, AND they can win it when they aren't.

Australia's "dominance" of England in the batting stakes in 2009 was largely down to most of their batsmen making merry on a complete road in Cardiff.

 

[Jono]

Would swap Sree for Tremlett in a heartbeat.

 

[Manee]

Disagree with Bun's ratings. IMO,

Broad>>>>>Ishant

Tremlett>>Sreesanth

Awta.

 

[Shri]

You can all argue about who is better than who as individual bowlers but the Indian bowlers' performance in the last two years cannot be measured by stats. They have somehow managed to click a lot of times without any individual brilliance apart from Zak. I think both teams would be equals when conditions assist the bowlers. No one expected the Indian bowling to win certain tests because of their bowling but they surprised their opponents in a handful of games and won them.

 

[Jono]

I agree. Hence why player-to-player comparisons prove very little.

But if we were just arguing as to whether I'd prefer Sree or Tremlett, I'd take Tremeltt.

 

[Cevno]

Would rather play Praveen Kumar in England than either Sree or Ishant.

And tbf,to Bun Broad does not have much better overall numbers than Sharma.
Though i would say he is better,but not my much.

But Tremlett >>>> Sreesanth

And Gambhir >>> Cook.

 

[GIMH]

Bun pulling out some classics here

Sree better than Tremlett? Funniest thing since you said you were competent in the English language. ****.

 

[Furball]

Would rather play Praveen Kumar in England than either Sree or Ishant.

And tbf,to Bun Broad does not have much better overall numbers than Sharma.
Though i would say he is better,but not my much.

But Tremlett >>>> Sreesanth

And Gambhir >>> Cook.

Huge call.

 

[Teja.]

The extremeness of his call or the direction of it?

Would consider Gambhir better than Cook too myself though It'd be one '>' and not three.

 

[Howe_zat]

Gambhir being better than Cook would be just about accepted everywhere a year ago, so it's not exactly unarguable now. However, taking in recent form I'd say it's about even. Factor in home advantage and I'd be tempted to have Cook ahead.

 

[Cevno]

Wasn't exactly indicating the distance with the number of >>>> .
Had a typo with 3 in one and 4 in the other.

Don't think Sreesanth is so much worse than Tremlett either,specially in English conditions.

And Gambhir has now performed consistently for India over a period of time in all countries including NZ AND SA .
Though he did not have a great overall year in 2010 it was a bit start stop for him, he performs every time in crucial situations accross formats.

 

[Cevno]

Gambhir being better than Cook would be just about accepted everywhere a year ago, so it's not exactly unarguable now. However, taking in recent form I'd say it's about even. Factor in home advantage and I'd be tempted to have Cook ahead.

He did perform well in SA despite people not expecting him too ,me included.
And also in NZ.
So i think he would also do alright in England.

Besides Cook himself has a better away record by a decent margin than his home record.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Tremlett has bowled really well in his Tests, but my issue with him is whether he can do it over a long time. I don't think people doubted that he could do what he did in Australia, but he has a history of going missing and losing interest, was playing 2nd XI at Hampshire in 2009. I rate what he's done at Test level highly, I am just not as convinced as others that it will definitely continue.

 

[Cevno]

Bun pulling out some classics here

Sree better than Tremlett? Funniest thing since you said you were competent in the English language. ****.

Overall Tremlett is clearly better based on observation , though he has had only one series so far.

But in England with Sree being Primarily a pitch it up swing bowler and Tremlett's natural length being a bit shorter than ideal for English conditions the gap reduces bit like in South Africa.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Simply, both teams bowl and bat pretty well - England with a wider spread of bowling depth, India hold the advantage with the stick. But both team's weaker attribute have shown themselves to be able to be both consistent, and pull out superlative performances.

 

[Teja.]

Gambhir being better than Cook would be just about accepted everywhere a year ago, so it's not exactly unarguable now. However, taking in recent form I'd say it's about even. Factor in home advantage and I'd be tempted to have Cook ahead.

Always got the feeling Cook was a better away batsman than a home one though and the other way round with Gambhir. Know it's boosted heavily by the Ashes but a quick look at his career summary on Cricinfo tells me that Cook averages 41 at home and 54 and a half away. Wouldn't say the stats tell the full story regarding him by any means but he certainly isn't one whose relative comfort is disproportionately biased towards home.

Also, Gambhir despite being dismissed by many early to be a player destined to score bucketloads in the SC and nothing away but he had terrific series' in all three Non-SC countries he played in.

Think I can say fairly confidently that Gambhir, in my opinion, is by a small margin better than Cook, one dream Ashes series or not.