England can beat India "every day of week": Gough

[Furball]

Perhaps a better way to put it is that India and England can lose or play damn poorly to most teams at any time, home or away.

India vs. NZ recently and England vs. Pakistan and Australia (Perth) recently show that.

Fairer, but that's no different to Australia in the 90s. Even when the gulf between us was massive, England were still good enough to take the odd Test off Australia. The West Indies didn't lose a Test series for 15 years but at the same time they suffered from similar "inconsistencies" - their win record is nowhere near what I expected it to be.

If any of the top sides deserve to be hit with the "inconsistent" tag, it's South Africa.

 

[Jono]

Yes I strongly agree with that.

 

[NasserFan207]

Wow, so many posts over something with such an obvious answer.

India are the favourites at home, and England are the favourites at home. England have the greater capacity to improve given India's ancient batting order.

Not much else to say really. How this thread reached 50 pages is bloody mindboggling.

Oh, and Gough is a prick. Met him actually, instantly disliked him.

 

[vcs]

Given the ****ness of their attack, it has to be said that India have been pretty consistent of late. They have been good at avoiding series defeats.

 

[akilana]

Given the ****ness of their attack, it has to be said that India have been pretty consistent of late. They have been good at avoiding series defeats.

tbf, Indian attack isn't bad. Their attack is good as England's and SA's IMO. Has one of the best fast bowler and one of the top two spinners in the world.

 

[Furball]

tbf, Indian attack isn't bad. Their attack is good as England's and SA's IMO. Has one of the best fast bowler and one of the top two spinners in the world.

England's attack is much better than either.

 

[Blaze 18]

tbf, Indian attack isn't bad. Their attack is good as England's and SA's IMO. Has one of the best fast bowler and one of the top two spinners in the world.

England have a much better all-round attack in that if you take away their two best bowlers (James Anderson and Graeme Swann), they still have decent bowlers. However, if you do the same for South Africa (Dale Steyn and Morne Morkel) and India (Zaheer Khan and Harbhajan Singh), their respective attacks become considerably weaker.

 

[silentstriker]

England's attack is much better than either.

No way. Better than India's, not better than SA.

 

[Prince EWS]

No way. Better than India's, not better than SA.

DWTA. But we've already had that exact debate in this thread.

 

[akilana]

England's attack is much better than either.

Agree, but SA's attack is more likely to win a test match in India than England's IMO.

 

[Blaze 18]

I suppose it depends on what you give more importance to; at full strength, South Africa's attack is better (yeah, because of that dude called Dale Steyn), but England aren't overly reliant on one bowler or, in other words, they have a better all-round attack.

 

[Blaze 18]

Agree, but SA's attack is more likely to win a test match in India than England's IMO.

I agree.

 

[Shri]

Agree, but SA's attack is more likely to win a test match in India than England's IMO.

Take Steyn out and the answer is no.

 

[silentstriker]

Take Steyn out and the answer is no.

Take Warne out and Australian spin bowling sucked in Ashes '05.



That's kind of the point, isn't it? The reason SA is more likely to win in India is because Steyn is capable of blasting out any lineup even on the flat pitches.

 

[Cevno]

Take Steyn out and the answer is no.

But why take Steyn out?

 

[Cevno]

I would like the English attack be tested in all conditions first before fully deciding.

This South African attack has done well everywhere really.

 

[Shri]

But why take Steyn out?

Because it is 2.30 AM and it seemed like a good idea at 1:47 AM.

 

[vcs]

i would like the english attack be tested in all conditions first before fully deciding.

This south african attack has done well everywhere really.

awta.

 

[NasserFan207]

I think some of the debate over whether SA or England have the better bowling attack comes from the fact that Indian supporters likely rate Steyn higher than English supporters, for obvious reasons.

 

[Teja.]

The answer for the 'SA vs Eng bowling attacks' question for me will be decided by how well Tremlett does over the next one year.

I have no doubt atm that SA with a fully fiit Steyn are a better team than England though and I'd fancy our chances in England if we win in SA, particularly because Morkel is an awesome home bowler and not-so-good away.(26vs32)