heh
Didn't really think about it 'til I saw this post. England have been really, really ordinary lately. Add in the draw against WI and they've been horrid.
I just don't see how you can come up with that based on recent performances at all
What a load of nonsense, they were just damn lucky to win 3 out of 5 tosses, and managed to draw the first test in which the toss really helped.
I think Chrish makes a valid point, and when comparing Eng/Aus it's a bit rich to hold the lost test to Bangladesh against us..........they are no joke side at home nowadays and at least we fronted up to the tour!! No one could say with any conviction that Aus would fair any better over there.
The only problem here is no other non-minnow has lost to Bangladesh (bar the Windies in '09), so until they beat someone else, it kind of does have to be held against England, especially since they were damn lucky not to lose the previous Test too If my memory serves.
Really silly to say the only reason they've been more competitive is because they've won tosses. They've comfortably been better than SA and NZ. Although still pretty bad, so they don't deserve much credit anyway.
Look at the matches both England and Australia have played in SC in past 2 years and look at how many times England have crossed 300 mark vs Australia. You will realize Australia have been consistently outscored by poms in Asia.. In this series alone England have scored 400+ three times. This to me clearly shows they can bat better than their non-asian counterparts in that part of the world. Yes wickets are on a flatter side but England have done the same in UAE as well.
Really silly to pretend the toss doesn't give the side batting first a pretty big advantage in India. That doesn't mean it's the be all and end all, but let's not pretend it's not much of a factor at all.
True that we've got no idea how Aus would go there, but it's not just that one series. England have had a habit lately of dropping Tests and drawing series against weak sides (that Aus then happened to wallop), eg. WI, NZ.
I don't think anyone would argue against that England have been better than Aus at batting in Asia
Bang on, & I'd agree England > Australia in the SC, but I'd say the same about both SA and NZ as well. The bigger point is I'm positive this series would have been much more comfortable for India had they won every toss, there's no doubt in my mind. And the only evidence we do have is the one Test they did bat 2nd and got romped by 250 runs, bigger than two of the 3 margins in the NZ series.
Not sure how closely you follow it but every Ashes series in England has actually been relatively close-fought, despite a couple of misleadingly one-sided scorelines (mostly 2013)You seem to have forgotten about Australia's continuous embarrassments in England also. Even India/Pakistan/NZ etc. have done better than Australia over there since 2001.
EDIT : @ TJB
