Does world cricket need a strong England?

[govinda indian fan]

Imo after bgt Australia clear best team in world
1. Aus
2. India/eng
3.eng/ ind
4. Nz
5.sa
6.sl
7.8.9.wi/ pak/ ban
Wont rate sa as second best team just because they made it to wtc final. They had easiest fixtures and havent played aus or eng in this cycle

 

[sayon basak]

England needs a strong cricket more than cricket needs a strong England.

 

[SteveNZ]

True but test cricket was perhaps the best it has been ever been from 1990-2005 and the Ashes were extremely uncompetitive

Yeah again, Test cricket was clearly the pinnacle then. It didn't need to compete with any, lest ODIs which were also big

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Imo after bgt Australia clear best team in world
1. Aus
2. India/eng
3.eng/ ind
4. Nz
5.sa
6.sl
7.8.9.wi/ pak/ ban
Wont rate sa as second best team just because they made it to wtc final. They had easiest fixtures and havent played aus or eng in this cycle

SA beat the Windies and Bangladesh away. I couldn't imagine England doing that.

 

[Molehill]

SA beat the Windies and Bangladesh away. I couldn't imagine England doing that.

Agreed, but I could totally imagine England beating SA Home and Away. It's just a match up that suits.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Agreed, but I could totally imagine England beating SA Home and Away. It's just a match up that suits.

That's fair

 

[centurymaker]

Let's wait till the WTC Final before dismissing SA completely. They might not be the 2nd best but what if they beat Aus in the final? And since Ind/Eng/NZ have been so inconsistent, I can't seem to put any of them as 2nd, at the moment.

 

[honestbharani]

I think winning the WTC should be good enough to get RSA to 2nd. I felt the same about NZ in the very first WTC. Overall, they were not even #2 in the world but winning a world title should help them rise up.

Sorta how winning a grandslam can boost someone in the tennis world rankings from #7 to a #2.

 

[Molehill]

Let's wait till the WTC Final before dismissing SA completely. They might not be the 2nd best but what if they beat Aus in the final? And since Ind/Eng/NZ have been so inconsistent, I can't seem to put any of them as 2nd, at the moment.

I could quite easily see SA winning this. If they get on the right side of a helpful toss, then there's no doubt they have the firepower in the bowling ranks to cause carnage to a suspect Aussie batting line up. But does that make them one of the top 2 teams? They've made the most of an easy qualification process, one that I suspect other teams would've qualified from too. It just highlights the flaws in the current system, but I hope they do win it to expose it.

 

[Chin Music]

I could quite easily see SA winning this. If they get on the right side of a helpful toss, then there's no doubt they have the firepower in the bowling ranks to cause carnage to a suspect Aussie batting line up. But does that make them one of the top 2 teams? They've made the most of an easy qualification process, one that I suspect other teams would've qualified from too. It just highlights the flaws in the current system, but I hope they do win it to expose it.

Yeah, I do reckon that if they have a fully fit bowling lineup, they could easily castle Australia for not very many in England, given favourable conditions. Their batting seems to have improved a bit over a couple of years but looks a little flakey, especially in the top 3.