**Official** England in The West Indies

[marc71178]

yes but not in the history of the game as their inability to beat india both home and away shows. IMO best side in the history of the game was the WI side of the late 70s and early 80s

I said one of the best, and there's not many who would disagree that.

our bowling was no worse than indias bowling in australia....yet india nearly pulled off a victory down under.

Yes, because they have a far better batting line-up than England, and also were facing a weaker Aussie bowling line-up.

 

[Swervy]

I said one of the best, and there's not many who would disagree that.





Yes, because they have a far better batting line-up than England, and also were facing a weaker Aussie bowling line-up.

yeah and i would also say that Australia didnt play as well as they should have done with that weaker attack

 

[Lions81]

I said one of the best, and there's not many who would disagree that.





Yes, because they have a far better batting line-up than England, and also were facing a weaker Aussie bowling line-up.

Agreed on the first part, disagreed on the second part. McGrath and Warne didn't play, okay fine. Warne would have been belted around the park as usual against India, McGrath would have been good. It wasn't that much weaker, unless the Aussies are so dependent on old man McGrath, and if so, they'd better hope Bracken learns to locate the stumps in short order.

And also regarding my prediction for the series, with Lara out, I must readjust it.

Previously I had West Indies 5-2, now I have them winning 4-3. England are a really bad ODI team. Sorry England supporters but you have to admit it. You are a much better Test team than the West Indies, but a much worse ODI team. And Marc, don't pull those ICC rankings up again! I think Windies have a significantly better lineup with Lara and a marginally better one without him. England don't have ODI players the caliber of Gayle, Chanderpaul or Sarwan. Unless you count Nasser "Every match is a test match for me" Hussain.

And tooextracool, I certainly do wish I was partying in the stands with Sarwan and company!

 

[marc71178]

Agreed on the first part, disagreed on the second part. McGrath and Warne didn't play, okay fine. Warne would have been belted around the park as usual against India,

And you can guarantee that can you?

Are you seriously saying that the attacks Aus used in that series are anywhere near as good as the attack that played England (save for the 5th Test)?

England are a really bad ODI team. Sorry England supporters but you have to admit it.

So bad that last summer we beat SA and Pak?

I accept we're not the best, but we're definitely one of the big group of teams (which basically includes everyone except Aus, Ban and Zim) that can beat any of the others in that group on their day - it is too close to call.

England don't have ODI players the caliber of Gayle, Chanderpaul or Sarwan. Unless you count Nasser "Every match is a test match for me" Hussain.

Shows how much you know about the England ODI side if you include Hussain.

To counter those 3 we have the likes of Flintoff, Collingwood and Trescothick.

Oh, and don't forget Vaughan, who in spite of his career average, is doing a good job at 3 IMO.

Also, be interesting to see the 2 bowling line-ups - if Gough, Anderson and Flintoff are together, then that isn't a bad set of bowlers for 30 of the 50 overs.

 

[Lions81]

And you can guarantee that can you?

Are you seriously saying that the attacks Aus used in that series are anywhere near as good as the attack that played England (save for the 5th Test)?

Okay let's look at the bowling attacks then:

For the first four tests, these are the full-time bowlers who played for Australia (So I'm not counting Waugh, Lehmann and Martyn):

McGrath
Gillespie
Bichel
Warne
Lee
MacGill

Okay of these six, four played against India. Only McGrath and Warne didn't. But those are the top two bowlers right? Okay, let's examine their stats against India:

McGrath, I grant you, he is excellent against India no matter where. His average in Australia is a phenomenal 16.08, so definitely he was missed. But again, is the vaunted Australian attack so utterly dependent on one man?

Warne, in 11 matches in Australia versus India, he has the fantastic bowling average of 55.54. Yeah, he would've been a real asset.

So how was that attack so much better than the one India played?

Wait, let me anticipate the excuses. They were all out of form when India came by to play. Oh, tough noogies!

 

[marc71178]

For crying out loud - if you take McGrath and Warne out of a 4 man attack it'd be the equivalent of taking Tendulkar, Dravid and Laxman out of the Indian batting line-up.

Also, it was for a whole series - missing 2 of the best bowlers of the last decade for even one game is hard, but a whole series is an absolute nightmare.

It doesn't matter about their past record, it's the overall record that has more bearing.

Those 2 missed a Test against what was in some places an England reserve side (I lost count of the injuries we suffered in that series) and England well and truly beat them. Had they been fit, I have no doubt the result would have been different.

 

[Lions81]

For crying out loud - if you take McGrath and Warne out of a 4 man attack it'd be the equivalent of taking Tendulkar, Dravid and Laxman out of the Indian batting line-up.

Also, it was for a whole series - missing 2 of the best bowlers of the last decade for even one game is hard, but a whole series is an absolute nightmare.

It doesn't matter about their past record, it's the overall record that has more bearing.

Those 2 missed a Test against what was in some places an England reserve side (I lost count of the injuries we suffered in that series) and England well and truly beat them. Had they been fit, I have no doubt the result would have been different.

What is this overall record business? Warne has never done anything against India. Never. Look it up. He destroys other teams but can't do anything against India. There's no reason to believe he would have this time. So again, it's down to McGrath. Admittedly, his loss was big. But how big of a difference could McGrath honestly have made on that series? He would've been coming to bowl straight away from being injured on his ankle, a critical part of fast bowler's body.

 

[marc71178]

It doesn't matter why he missed it, McGrath was still missing.

Warne's record against India is poor, but that doesn't guarantee anything about future performances.

I mean, SRT's record at 4 is awesome, yet you've said move him to 6 because he only scored 1 in the current Test, so in that case you're disregarding the past history.

 

[Lions81]

It doesn't matter why he missed it, McGrath was still missing.

Warne's record against India is poor, but that doesn't guarantee anything about future performances.

I mean, SRT's record at 4 is awesome, yet you've said move him to 6 because he only scored 1 in the current Test, so in that case you're disregarding the past history.

Because recently he's been bad under pressure. So when the team is 30/2, don't bring Tendulkar in at 4. And if you look at his last 11 matches at 4, like Warne's 11 matches vs. India, I'm sure his record stops looking quite so awesome.

 

[Lions81]

Also, let me see if I understand you correctly.

You want to ignore Warne's previously poor performances against India, because he "could" have done better the last time, but you base McGrath's importance on his past good performances. Why couldn't McGrath just as easily have done poorly this time? You want to discard past history against a team to look at an overall picture. So a bastman who plays six matches, 3 versus Bangladesh and 3 versus Australia, and who scores 100,100,100 versus Bangladesh and 0,0,0 versus Australia, for a nice average of 50, is equally as likely to score a 50 against either team? Of course not! Only be looking at stats versus a team can one come even remotely close to accurately predicting future results.

 

[tooextracool]

Yes, because they have a far better batting line-up than England, and also were facing a weaker Aussie bowling line-up.

so it wasnt just our weak bowling.......it was also the fact that we didnt bat well enough.

 

[tooextracool]

Previously I had West Indies 5-2, now I have them winning 4-3. England are a really bad ODI team. Sorry England supporters but you have to admit it. You are a much better Test team than the West Indies, but a much worse ODI team. And Marc, don't pull those ICC rankings up again! I think Windies have a significantly better lineup with Lara and a marginally better one without him. England don't have ODI players the caliber of Gayle, Chanderpaul or Sarwan. Unless you count Nasser "Every match is a test match for me" Hussain.

yes england are a really bad odi team...beating pakistan and south africa last year...how horrible.
meanwhile west indies is an amazing ODI side that absolutely hammered SA in SA(in one game) before getting 54 all out and losing the series 3-1. ahh gayle,sarwan and chanderpaul must be sending shivers down the goughs,flintoffs and andersons backs already.

 

[tooextracool]

What is this overall record business? Warne has never done anything against India. Never. Look it up. He destroys other teams but can't do anything against India. There's no reason to believe he would have this time. So again, it's down to McGrath. Admittedly, his loss was big. But how big of a difference could McGrath honestly have made on that series? He would've been coming to bowl straight away from being injured on his ankle, a critical part of fast bowler's body.

in warnes last series against india in australia he took 4/92,2/21,1/77,1/63,0/22,0/60 at an economy rate of 2.64. while these arent outstanding figures they arent that bad particularly in the first test. compare this to macgill's 0/200 and 1/250 at ER's of 5 and 6 and those figures look god like. warne might not have taken that many wickets but he would definetly have done a better job than macgill and would at least have built up the pressure at one end. it seemed that in the recent series against australia while gillespie bowled one good over at one end, macgill would follow it up with 3 long hops and 3 decent deliveries that were all dispatched to the boundary with equal disdain.
mcgrath and warne would have made the difference but i dont think australia will admit that they were missed so dearly because this bowling attack was supposed to be their future and it doesnt look to bright now does it?(kaspa might have something to say about that)

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

yes england are a really bad odi team...beating pakistan and south africa last year...how horrible.
meanwhile west indies is an amazing ODI side that absolutely hammered SA in SA(in one game) before getting 54 all out and losing the series 3-1. ahh gayle,sarwan and chanderpaul must be sending shivers down the goughs,flintoffs and andersons backs already.

Actually, we got bowled out for 54 then hammered South Africa, then lost the series 3-1. Get the order right. :P

 

[tooextracool]

Actually, we got bowled out for 54 then hammered South Africa, then lost the series 3-1. Get the order right. :P

actually WI got bowled out for 54,then lost, then hammered SA and then lost the series 3-1.get the order right yourself

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

actually WI got bowled out for 54,then lost, then hammered SA and then lost the series 3-1.get the order right yourself

Actually West Indies got bowled out for 54, then lost, then were rained out, the hammered SA, then lost the series 3-1.

 

[marc71178]

Because recently he's been bad under pressure. So when the team is 30/2, don't bring Tendulkar in at 4. And if you look at his last 11 matches at 4, like Warne's 11 matches vs. India, I'm sure his record stops looking quite so awesome.

When you posted that it was 970 runs @ 57.06 - a shocking drop that is (!)

 

[marc71178]

Of course not! Only be looking at stats versus a team can one come even remotely close to accurately predicting future results.

A player's career average is a much better indicator of their ability when the player in question has played such a long career.

 

[biased indian]

A player's career average is a much better indicator of their ability when the player in question has played such a long career.

it will be true if the player has played only one series or couple of test aganist the country that u are discussing

warne has played 11 test matches both at home and away aganist different
indian teams.but his performance was the same aganist them all the time
very very pooooor

 

[Swervy]

I have just come in from the pub,and I cannot beleive the amount of rubbish that is being spouted on this forum today.

When it comes down to it, no-one can really predict what is going to happen in the ODI series between England and WI....it is quite realistic that WI have a shocker and lose 7-0, and it is quite possible that England will have a shocker and lose 7-0. The probabilty is that the series will be a lot closer, the result of which could go either way.

England are probably the more talented team, but WI have more to fight for.It wouldnt be a shock either way if either team wins the series by what ever score...and to be honest ..who really cares

I am getting a bit fed up of this rather boring thing that is going around about Australia vs India, or Warne vs India. When will people realise that Australia on the whole are miles ahead of any team in the world. Yes India have done very well vs a weaker Aussie team in the last few months (it was still a drawn series, despite what a lot of people will make out on here), and yes India beat Australia in India a couple of years ago (despite the fact that on the balance, Australia were probably more than equal to India, apart from one big partnership , a couple of ropey decisions(but that cricket, so no complaining here),and a one man bowling performance by yesterdays news Harbajan.

India do play against Australias weaknesses well, but talent wise, there really is no comparison...who ever said on another thread that the like of Hayden,langer etc are not talented, just doent know what they are talking about.

When it comes down to it ,in ODI's, Australia are the class team....after that WI, England,SA, Sri Lanka, NZ,Pakistan and India can all beat each other on any given day...no team is that much talented than the other.

England seem to be fashionable to slag off as a team, when really they are a lot better than many would think. I personally dont think there is a better bowling attack in ODI than England's (apart from Australia's) and with a bit of fine tuning the batting could be very good