• 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.

First West Indies, then Australia....who next?

Turbinator

Turbinator

Cricketer Of The Year
first came the dominance of the west indies, then australia.........rest haf so far only played second fiddle to these teams...............whos turn is it next?

IMO i truly believe it cud be India's turn under dravid and sehhwag.................or Pakistan under younis khan!!!!!!!!!
 
Turbinator

Turbinator

Cricketer Of The Year
First came the dominance of the west indies, then australia.........rest haf so far only played second fiddle to these teams...............whos turn is it next?

IMO i truly believe it cud be India's turn under dravid and sehhwag.................or Pakistan under younis khan!!!!!!!!!
 
BoyBrumby

BoyBrumby

Englishman
I think sooner or later India must become the number one team, purely on grounds of the playing resources at their disposal. Think it'll be medium/long term tho.

In the short term my guess is that Oz will hang on to their undisputed title for a couple or three years yet & then there may be an interregnum where no one is clearly the number one.
 
Neil Pickup

Neil Pickup

Request Your Custom Title Now!
The West Indies dominated because of their pace attack.
Australia because of McGrath and Warne (and to a lesser extent Gillespie plus support).

India and Pakistan won't dominate until they have an attack that can regularly take 20 Australian, English or South African wickets away from the subcontinent.
 
Autobahn

Autobahn

State 12th Man
Neil Pickup said:
The West Indies dominated because of their pace attack.
Australia because of McGrath and Warne (and to a lesser extent Gillespie plus support).
Click to expand...
I think the production line of aussie 50+ batsmen helped a tad...
 
Turbinator

Turbinator

Cricketer Of The Year
Neil Pickup said:
The West Indies dominated because of their pace attack.
Australia because of McGrath and Warne (and to a lesser extent Gillespie plus support).

India and Pakistan won't dominate until they have an attack that can regularly take 20 Australian, English or South African wickets away from the subcontinent.
Click to expand...

PLZZZZZZZZZ dont include England in this...........England IMO are HIGHLYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY overrated. India and pakistan both can regularly i believe take 20 english wickets even IN England. South africa is not such a great test team btw. And australia well, remember the 2003/2004 tests series between India and Australia in Australia. I agree that was a one time thing but hey wut can u say its Australia we're talkign bout. But all in all England and South africa in no means are better test playing nations then India and Pak.
 
Turbinator

Turbinator

Cricketer Of The Year
AussieDominance said:
just a word of caution dont do the PLZZZZZZZ and the HIGHLYYYYYYY it just annoys more people and distrupts the argument

Cheers
Click to expand...

sryy man ..........jus to use to it from like other forums where they do it alot..........but yea ill watch out
 
Lillian Thomson

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
West Indies dominated because a lot of fast bowlers just happen to appear in a short space of time.
Australia dominate due to putting a structure in place designed to give their sportsman the best chance of success. There's no reason to suppose that their dominance is about to end, Shane Warne maybe 36 but he could easily go on for another 4 years.
 
Magrat Garlick

Magrat Garlick

Rather Mad Witch
Turbinator said:
India and pakistan both can regularly i believe take 20 english wickets even IN England.
Click to expand...
Pakistan I won't argue with, at full strength (Gul, Shoaib, Kaneria, Asif) they could probably do it (see our abandoned farce), but India? Kumble's barely been effective outside the subcontinent, Pathan is even more on-and-off than Harmison, and the other seamers are unproven to say the least.

Last time India were in England, they took 55 wickets in 4 Tests. England's batting then included John Crawley, an old-school Flintoff, Robert Key and Mark Butcher (at various points). They've been replaced by Ian Bell, Alastair Cook and Paul Collingwood, who have all scored heavily against India and Pakistan in recent times. Meanwhile, India have replaced old seamers Zaheer and Agarkar with various permutations of Munaf/Sreesanth/Yuvraj/RP Singh. I'm struggling to see how that's much better?
 
Turbinator

Turbinator

Cricketer Of The Year
Samuel_Vimes said:
Pakistan I won't argue with, at full strength (Gul, Shoaib, Kaneria, Asif) they could probably do it (see our abandoned farce), but India? Kumble's barely been effective outside the subcontinent, Pathan is even more on-and-off than Harmison, and the other seamers are unproven to say the least.

Last time India were in England, they took 55 wickets in 4 Tests. England's batting then included John Crawley, an old-school Flintoff, Robert Key and Mark Butcher (at various points). They've been replaced by Ian Bell, Alastair Cook and Paul Collingwood, who have all scored heavily against India and Pakistan in recent times. Meanwhile, India have replaced old seamers Zaheer and Agarkar with various permutations of Munaf/Sreesanth/Yuvraj/RP Singh. I'm struggling to see how that's much better?
Click to expand...
Watch next year when India tour England in the summer, watch and you'll see.
 
A

AussieDominance

Banned
Lillian Thomson said:
West Indies dominated because a lot of fast bowlers just happen to appear in a short space of time.
Australia dominate due to putting a structure in place designed to give their sportsman the best chance of success. There's no reason to suppose that their dominance is about to end, Shane Warne maybe 36 but he could easily go on for another 4 years.
Click to expand...
Lillian

http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,20281848-23212,00.html

sorry for posting another news site but relevant for discussion
 
adharcric

adharcric

International Coach
Samuel_Vimes said:
Meanwhile, India have replaced old seamers Zaheer and Agarkar with various permutations of Munaf/Sreesanth/Yuvraj/RP Singh.
Click to expand...
When was the last time you saw Yuvraj bowling quick?
 
Mr Mxyzptlk

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Turbinator said:
Watch next year when India tour England in the summer, watch and you'll see.
Click to expand...
India struggled to take 20 West Indian wickets earlier this year, and the England is a far superior team. Where exactly does this wonderful Indian bowling attack come from by next year?
 
Mr Mxyzptlk

Mr Mxyzptlk

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Lillian Thomson said:
West Indies dominated because a lot of fast bowlers just happen to appear in a short space of time.
Australia dominate due to putting a structure in place designed to give their sportsman the best chance of success. There's no reason to suppose that their dominance is about to end, Shane Warne maybe 36 but he could easily go on for another 4 years.
Click to expand...
Is this fine Australian structure actually producing any bowlers of high quality though? Because they seem to be rather conspicuously absent.
 
aussie

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
I'm not sure, but i think England & Pakistan after Australia lose the mantle of world number one. Since they have the batting talent & bowling resources to be a force both at home & away consistently once all of their players are fit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top