Dhoni V Prior (Tests)

[Cevno]

Since the start of 2010 Steyn has averaged 20.5, and Jimmy about 22. Both really sodding good. Which is i think the point GingerFurball is trying to make. They've comfortably been the best for a while now. But i would obv. put Steyn ahead.

I also find it hard to believe people are saying its a hard call between Tsotsobe and Broad. The guy is knocking on Sammys door atm.

Zaheer is averaging 21.8 in 2010 too.

But i am a bit suspect of relying on one year only for a player(as one series in flat conditions in Srilanka/Abu Dhabi can affect stats or a low scoring one against Pakistan), and so would still put Steyn and ahead of both ZAK and Jimmy.

Also no one said it was a hard call between Broad and Tsotsobe. Broad is ahead but not by a massive margin. And since you are going by last years averages, averaged 38 last year.

Still all of that does not explain how England have a "Vastly superior" attack in the first place. You could say they have a advantage(Which i am unsure of tbh as it is very close) but strongly disagree with Vastly.

 

[centurymaker]

Lol at your excuse for not factoring in Kallis.

Fair enough post otherwise. The South African attack doesn't look much worse on paper, if at all, but having watched the two attacks over the past year or so the difference in effectiveness is pretty obvious. South Africa struggle to maintain pressure when Steyn and Morkel aren't bowling but England just keep coming at you all day. The Indian batting lineup were able to negate South Africa to an extent just by seeing the best bowlers off- at one stage in the second test farming the strike to keep Steyn away from the tail because the difference in bowling quality from each end was so huge. Against England you just can't use a tactic like that. It's a pretty good demonstration of how the weakest member of a four-man attack is just as important as the strongest.

but even trying to see off steyn and morkel is incredibly hard (they are more lethal- plus they bowl aggresively) iirc only 2/3 100s were scored against them in that series.

while the english bowlers make it incredibly hard for you to score off them by consistently bowling good line and lenths hour after hour, and therefore you eventually succumb to pressure and get out.
i'll say both attacks are equal, now that broad's back in form

 

[Uppercut]

But they didn't win the series. Didn't win the one before that either.

Just to be clear, Steyn's better than Anderson by a big enough margin for it not to be up for debate, and Morkel's better than Tremlett by a big enough margin for it not to be up for debate. It might even be by a bigger margin than Broad+Swann are better than Kallis+Harris+Lopsy.

That's called comparing the sides on paper. It's pointless. You don't have to watch the players bowl individually and try to add up their cumulative value to decide which attack is better. You can just watch the two sides in the field and see which one is more effective as a unit. Here's what you'll find: it's England. And it isn't especially close.

 

[centurymaker]

But they didn't win the series. Didn't win the one before that either.

Just to be clear, Steyn's better than Anderson by a big enough margin for it not to be up for debate, and Morkel's better than Tremlett by a big enough margin for it not to be up for debate. It might even be by a bigger margin than Broad+Swann are better than Kallis+Harris+Lopsy.

That's called comparing the sides on paper. It's pointless. You don't have to watch the players bowl individually and try to add up their cumulative value to decide which attack is better. You can just watch the two sides in the field and see which one is more effective as a unit. Here's what you'll find: it's England. And it isn't especially close.

against SA:
136, 459, 205, 228, 364, 166/3

against Eng:
286, 261

we'll know by the end of the series.

 

[Uppercut]

Haha India aren't the only team in the world that counts!

Why don't you check out how the respective attacks fared against Pakistan this time last year?

 

[centurymaker]

Haha India aren't the only team in the world that counts!

Why don't you check out how the respective attacks fared against Pakistan this time last year?

yea uae tracks are comparable to english tracks

 

[Howe_zat]

Since we're bringing up stats, here's the collective averages since the two sides last met:

England: 17 matches, 303 wickets at 26.49
South Africa: 10 matches, 150 wickets at 33.76

 

[centurymaker]

Haha India aren't the only team in the world that counts!

Why don't you check out how the respective attacks fared against Pakistan this time last year?

have the two teams played any other decent side in the last 1 year? NO

 

[Howe_zat]

Always love how English tracks are the only reason England do well when we're talking about the bowling. And then with batting, it's mysteriously never mentioned...

 

[Furball]

have the two teams played any other decent side in the last 1 year? NO

Australia say hi.

 

[Cevno]

Haha India aren't the only team in the world that counts!

Why don't you check out how the respective attacks fared against Pakistan this time last year?

You were the one that brought the India comparison up(which is odd considering the series has just started and that SA beat a less injury affected India side by a much bigger margin in the first test) and the 2 series against Pakistan were played in contrasting conditions.

 

[centurymaker]

Since we're bringing up stats, here's the collective averages since the two sides last met:

England: 17 matches, 303 wickets at 26.49
South Africa: 10 matches, 150 wickets at 33.76

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...n;team=1;team=3;template=results;type=bowling

better indicator

 

[Uppercut]

Always love how English tracks are the only reason England do well when we're talking about the bowling. And then with batting, it's mysteriously never mentioned...

Haha if you think England get a bum deal in this respect you should see what happens to the South Africans.

 

[centurymaker]

Australia say hi.

southafrica haven't played them for more than 2 years...
can't compare until later in the year.

i probably should've said-
have Both the teams played any other decent side in the last 1 year? NO

 

[Howe_zat]

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...n;team=1;team=3;template=results;type=bowling

better indicator

Include West Indies, exclude Pakistan? Come on.

 

[Furball]

But they didn't win the series. Didn't win the one before that either.

Just to be clear, Steyn's better than Anderson by a big enough margin for it not to be up for debate, and Morkel's better than Tremlett by a big enough margin for it not to be up for debate. It might even be by a bigger margin than Broad+Swann are better than Kallis+Harris+Lopsy.

That's called comparing the sides on paper. It's pointless. You don't have to watch the players bowl individually and try to add up their cumulative value to decide which attack is better. You can just watch the two sides in the field and see which one is more effective as a unit. Here's what you'll find: it's England. And it isn't especially close.

I wouldn't say the difference between Steyn and Anderson just now is particularly big. Steyn's the better bowler on account of performing at a higher level for longer. The difference in performance between the two in the last 2 years is fairly negligible.

 

[Cevno]

Always love how English tracks are the only reason England do well when we're talking about the bowling. And then with batting, it's mysteriously never mentioned...

Talking about a particular series here which many English Fans have mentioned themselves previously in Batting comparison's to be a low scoring one plus all the crisis around Pakistan.

And the tracks in Abu Dhabi for the SA series were particularly flat.

 

[Furball]

You were the one that brought the India comparison up(which is odd considering the series has just started and that SA beat a less injury affected India side by a much bigger margin in the first test) and the 2 series against Pakistan were played in contrasting conditions.

Zaheer at least bowled in the first Test; it's utter nonsense to suggest India were less affected by injury in South Africa.

 

[centurymaker]

Always love how English tracks are the only reason England do well when we're talking about the bowling. And then with batting, it's mysteriously never mentioned...

did english batsmen do well last summer at home ? no

uae produces the flattest pitches ever seen!!

 

[Furball]

Talking about a particular series here which many English Fans have mentioned themselves previously in Batting comparison's to be a low scoring one plus all the crisis around Pakistan.

And the tracks in Abu Dhabi for the SA series were particularly flat.

So was Adelaide.

The Pakistan series is a good indicator of what happens to the South African attack when Steyn doesn't bowl well.