***Official*** India in England

[aussie]

Well, seeing as our problems came from (a) batting indiscipline and (b) wicketkeeping, I don't see how a change of bowling would have sorted that out at all. Sidebottom, Anderson and Tremlett all bowled better than some of the rubbish Harmison has served up for the last year or so, and Jones isn't going to be properly fit again.

We missed Flintoff's balance and Hoggard's Hoggardness, but India were by far the better side and deserved the series.

And that is HUGE factor in the outcome in this series & that cannot be underrated. Freddie & Hoggard plus any 1 or 2 of Sidebottom, Anderson, Tremlett would have exposed India classy but ageing batting as was shown in South Africa earlier this year.

To look for excuses is to escape the point - India have just thrown off the tags of being unable to generate a decent seam attack, to play swinging balls, to leave the subcontinent, and to battle and grit things out when it's tough. England, on the other hand, are presently showing a distinct lack in the testicular department: when it gets a little bit tough we crack like South Africans.

For me, now, India are #2]

. And you wouldn't believe just how much that sentence hurt to type.

Nah this win doesn't suddenly make them second best in the world at all. If now when they go to Australia they get beaten badly & lose to Pakistan while England on the other hand get hopefully get a relief of this injury crisis & win in SRI & NZ, what will happen then. England @ full strenght are still second best, unfortunately they haven't been able to build on their Ashes success due to all these injuries.

 

[R_D]

Jones isn't ever goin to be any good... let alone play for Eng again so can people stop talking about him every series... he hasn't played for over 2 years now. Harmless is usless. Freddie with injuries.. not sure how well he's going to go.
I'd be very suprised if England even win a test match in Sri Lanka. No chance in hell i say.. Murali will run through the lineup.
Maybe Indian should start their own excuse as well... if only Pathan had continued on from the promise he sawed in Pakistan and if only Munaf wasn't a such a lazy git.

Personlly i don't think there's any clear number 2 side...its like last year or 2... One sides seems to be pulling away to be clear #2 but than it goes back to being medicore again and is caught up other sides. As it is Aus clear #1... daylight and than rest of Eng, Pak, Ind etc..

 

[adharcric]

Hoggard's absence is the only genuine excuse England can offer on this occasion. Flintoff has been on-and-off since that glorious Ashes campaign and Jones has just been off. Harmison has been terrible and Tremlett may well have exceeded Harmison's expected output in this series. Quite impressed by the performance of the English attack, actually. Anderson can be a real force if he develops more consistency (somewhat like a right-arm Zaheer); Sidebottom is a solid reserve to have and an intelligent bowler as well; Tremlett has some great tools and could go a long way with the right guidance. The English batsmen - barring Vaughan and Pietersen - were the big disappointments on this tour, albeit against some quality swing bowling from Zaheer Khan and RP Singh.

 

[adharcric]

I don't know about that. India won in WI 1-0, lost in SA 2-1, and won in England 1-0. That's three wins outside the subcontinent in one year, and three more than what they managed between 1986-2001. But we really still not consistent enough to warrant jumping above England. England are struggling a bit in the last year after having a great 3-4 years. India did OK in the last 3-4 years, and are having a very good 1 year. I think before rankings change, both sides need to prove themselves one way or another.

I agree. India need to beat Pakistan at home and draw with Australia away to earn that #2 position. On another note, the future of this English test side looks pretty good. Provided that Anderson and Tremlett keep going and Hoggard stays healthy, they will have a good attack to complement Panesar. Don't like Strauss in the lineup, tbh. Prior's keeping really needs to be dealt with though. Once Flintoff returns, I would strongly consider a keeper who can keep well and hang in there at #8 unless Prior shows some improvement.

 

[adharcric]

I'm sure Freddie and Hoggard would've made a huge difference but same with Munaf for India.

Not really. Munaf at his best is better than RP was on this tour, but not by much. RP did quite well and knocked over the opposition's best batsmen. Had Munaf been fit, he would not have gotten a game over Zaheer or Sreesanth. That said, the prospect of adding (a hopefully fit) Munaf to this trio is pretty damn exciting.

 

[pietersenrocks]

may be,not Munaf.But,Hoggy&Freddie are really key players for England and damn consistent too.But,Am really happy with England's performance and we're bi unlucky to lose the series.Young attack has dun quite a fabulous job.Especially,Jimmy.

 

[Manee]

Sorry for the rant which I am about to partake in...

RP Singh is an interesting one indeed, he does not seem 'raw' (for lack of a better word) enough to open the bowling. He is almost McGrath-like, he could bowl faster and more agressively, but rather hits the right line and length and manipulates movement of the ball. Michael Holding pointed out an interesting thing when he said that RP Singh swings it from the hand and not late. With this, his swing becomes useless because the batsman can adjust. He shows an ability to swing it both ways without the difficulty in line and length that someone like Anderson has, but Anderson gets late swing and so it makes him a hundred times more deadly.

RP Singh has a spectacular (to say the least) first class bowling record in India, one of the best strike rates and a fine average too. This shows he can play inside and out of India and this versatility is good. RP's bouncer is also something that if worked on, can be extremely useful. He seems to get bounce without a noticeable change in action, or a grunt or anything, the bouncer comes before the batsman knows it, and it is a good height; not like Zaheer's 15 foot high bouncers.

India are in a very good position with fast bowlers currently, RP Singh, Sreesanth, Zaheer Khan and Munaf Patel are all test standard with the latter's fitnes the only concern. Irfan Pathan and Pankaj Singh are consistantly impressing for India A with ball AND bat too and so they will be pushing them for places. Hopefully, this competition helps the ones in the team to raise their game.

The one I worry about is Sreesanth. Not only has he lost his 90mph pace that flickered since he left the MRF Pace Foundation (although he did hit 91mph once in the series, didn't approach there for longer than a ball a spell), and his consistancy is poor. One spell is right on the money, the other is awful. I feel this may come from him trying too much stuff. Going wide of the crease only sends his weight in another direction and considering he gets all his pace from his run up, this can lose him a lot of pace. He also trys to swing it one way and then another, almost alternating ball by ball, this does nothing for line and length and consistancy and somebody (hopefully Prasad) can have a word and help him with this.

 

[Xuhaib]

I don't know about that. India won in WI 1-0, lost in SA 2-1, and won in England 1-0. That's three wins outside the subcontinent in one year, and three more than what they managed between 1986-2001. But we really still not consistent enough to warrant jumping above England. England are struggling a bit in the last year after having a great 3-4 years. India did OK in the last 3-4 years, and are having a very good 1 year. I think before rankings change, both sides need to prove themselves one way or another.

I would say that if India go into Australia and manage to win even one Test, I would probably put them equal to England. If they draw in Australia, then I would probably say they are #2. Not yet though. We are doing well with our seam attack and in swinging conditions, but I am not convinced that it is a new era and not just a temporary moment in the sun.

Sidebottom, Anderson and Tremmletr all looks like they have a lot of potential. Especially Tremmlet if he can be more consistent in using his height could be a real handful. So even with the first string out, England's attack will just get better IMO. Panesar wasn't very good though, averaging over a hundred against the top order, which must be disappointing especially at the oval where there was turn.



I am not sure how ODI comes into it.



Agreed, but they've now won a series in WI against a bad team. Won a for the first time in history in South Africa, against a decent if not great side and won a series in England in 20 years. ALl that within 13 months means India are on the right track, though far from where they need to be to say clearly that they are #2.

Actually, with the development of Malinga and the fact that Murali is still going strong, I would probably nominate SL as a potential #2 side in the short term. If England keep falling away that is.

Right now, for me, it would probably be something like 1) Aus 2) Eng 3) Ind/SL 4) SA 5) Pak 6) NZ 7) WI for me.

Why is Pakistan so low in your list, in the last 3 years we have had only only one bad series and that was to England in the last summer and you have to remember we were without our main seam attack. Pakistan and India were equally competitive in SA and Pakistan's home record has been pretty impressive lately and add to that they were able to manage a series win in NZL and SL.

 

[silentstriker]

Why is Pakistan so low in your list, in the last 3 years we have had only only one bad series and that was to England in the last summer and you have to remember we were without our main seam attack. Pakistan and India were equally competitive in SA and Pakistan's home record has been pretty impressive lately and add to that they were able to manage a series win in NZL and SL.

Only because I don't know the status of their best players - Shoaib, Inzy and Asif.

 

[TheGreatAusie]

A bit off topic from the current discussion but as I'm in England this summer, does anyone know what channel will be broadcasting the India vs. Scotland game tomorrow, if any?

 

[Jono]

Firstly, there is really no use arguing over which test team is second best. Its so irrelevant.

But if we must, can someone explain why India have to draw the series in Australia to be second in the world? Considering India themselves are the only team to accomplish that in the past decade (IIRC), I hardly see how that is a litmus test.

India vs. Pakistan will be huge, as will England vs. SL. At the minute its just a bunch of mediocre teams who can all beat each other at any time anywhere in the world. SA included in that pile too (though I don't think they can win in the sub-continent at all atm).

 

[pasag]

At the minute its just a bunch of mediocre teams who can all beat each other at any time anywhere in the world.

So true, was just thinking that the other day.

 

[silentstriker]

So true, was just thinking that the other day.

Is that true though? I think it's probably more of a bunch of good teams battling out for second best. It's just that we have an amazing team at the top. The rest of the teams are actually pretty good, and only mediocre by comparison. In an era without such a dominant team, we probably would be saying how there has never been so many good teams all at once.

 

[Raghav]

Is that true though? I think it's probably more of a bunch of good teams battling out for second best. It's just that we have an amazing team at the top. The rest of the teams are actually pretty good, and only mediocre by comparison. In an era without such a dominant team, we probably would be saying how there has never been so many good teams all at once.

haha @ the avatar

 

[pasag]

Is that true though? I think it's probably more of a bunch of good teams battling out for second best. It's just that we have an amazing team at the top. The rest of the teams are actually pretty good, and only mediocre by comparison. In an era without such a dominant team, we probably would be saying how there has never been so many good teams all at once.

Nah disagree, there's a certain level of incompetence that's going around with the sides at the moment, the bowling is at all time low levels and the batting doesn't seem to be a heap better. And anyways, I would take a massive grain of salt with the cricketing opinions of anyone who thought Glenn McGrath was dire.

 

[silentstriker]

I would take a massive grain of salt with the cricketing opinions of anyone who thought Glenn McGrath was dire.

Zaheer Khan > (Wasim Akram + Alan Davidson). And McGrath makes Irfan Pathan look express. Can't take him seriously, can you?

That's all I'm going to say TBH.

 

[Jono]

LOL @ SS' avatar. That's friggin' gold.

 

[Turbinator]

LOL @ SS' avatar. That's friggin' gold.

 

[Raghav]

Zaheer Khan > (Wasim Akram + Alan Davidson). And McGrath makes Irfan Pathan look express. Can't take him seriously, can you?

That's all I'm going to say TBH.

No mate. Zaheer has got lot more to prove . Just one series cant make him a legand

 

[Turbinator]

Is that true though? I think it's probably more of a bunch of good teams battling out for second best. It's just that we have an amazing team at the top. The rest of the teams are actually pretty good, and only mediocre by comparison. In an era without such a dominant team, we probably would be saying how there has never been so many good teams all at once.

I pretty much agree with that.

But your avatar is a whole different story. Dire how you changed your opinion about our seamers based on one series. And I know you want to display your new found love for our classy seamers, but dissing a legend like McGrath while you're at it... despicable.