• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Does world cricket need a strong England?

Does world cricket need a strong England?

  • Total voters
    25
S

SteveNZ

International Coach
Does Test cricket need a strong England? Well yeah it kinda does, when the Ashes is one of the flagship series of that format. If the Ashes wasn't at all competitive for the next 10-20 years, that wouldn't be in the interest of the game
 
S

Silly Point 2.0

Cricket Spectator
Probably yes if the "big three" want to keep going down the route they are now, wanting to play each other more often in the name of coin. On a national level, whatever the national team are doing, cricket will always have a relatively small but loyal band of followers here.
 
capt_Luffy

capt_Luffy

International Coach
Silly Point 2.0 said:
Probably yes if the "big three" want to keep going down the route they are now, wanting to play each other more often in the name of coin. On a national level, whatever the national team are doing, cricket will always have a relatively small but loyal band of followers here.
Click to expand...
England is sufficiently strong now really compared to the other 2..... Or they are equally weak, especially India. England have the weakest bowling but comfortably the best batting.
 
F

Fuller Pilch

Hall of Fame Member
SteveNZ said:
Does Test cricket need a strong England? Well yeah it kinda does, when the Ashes is one of the flagship series of that format. If the Ashes wasn't at all competitive for the next 10-20 years, that wouldn't be in the interest of the game
Click to expand...
True but test cricket was perhaps the best it has been ever been from 1990-2005 and the Ashes were extremely uncompetitive
 
L Trumper

L Trumper

State Regular
Fuller Pilch said:
True but test cricket was perhaps the best it has been ever been from 1990-2005 and the Ashes were extremely uncompetitive
Click to expand...
This isn't true though, that's probably the first time since WW2 when test cricket's primacy was challenged.
Especially from around early 90s to 00s ODIs were much more popular than tests. In fact England is probably the only country where that didn't happen.
 
centurymaker

centurymaker

Cricketer Of The Year
L Trumper said:
This isn't true though, that's probably the first time since WW2 when test cricket's primacy was challenged.
Especially from around early 90s to 00s ODIs were much more popular than tests. In fact England is probably the only country where that didn't happen.
Click to expand...
Thats true. ODIs were a big big deal in the 90s. So when we rate players, there should be some consideration paid to how the greats of the era adapted to the other format as well.

If you aren't able to adapt to another format which was equally important at times, then you aren't a complete cricketer, are you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top