The Battle for Number 2 (no pun intended)

[Sanz]

TBF, Subcontinent win should be very important if want to have any legit claim of no.1/2, if you cant do that then at least you should wait for sometime before declaring yourself as No. 2 and try beating australia in next ashes. I will accept England as legit no. 2 if they can either win or draw ashes 2007 and continue winning everywhere else except Subcontinet.

I wasn't expecting England to win in India, but at least they should have managed a draw esp on the pitches they have played so far. They lost the second test within 3 days and these pitches are nowhere near the turners India used to dish out to visiting teams throughout the 90s.

 

[Matt79]

Obviously he's not a Tendaulkar or Lara, let alone a Bradman, but Vaughan is the class batsman of the English side.

Injuries always happen - Mcgrath missed two ashes tests, we lost two ashes tests. In judging teams against each other, you have to consider the teams they'd normally (realistically) field against each other, most of the time.

 

[Matt79]

TBF, Subcontinent win should be very important if want to have any legit claim of no.1/2, if you cant do that then at least you should wait for sometime before declaring yourself as No. 2 and try beating australia in next ashes. I will accept England as legit no. 2 if they can either win or draw ashes 2007 and continue winning everywhere else except Subcontinet.

I wasn't expecting England to win in India, but at least they should manage a draw at least on the pitches they have played so far. These pitches are nowhere near the turners India used to dish out to visiting teams throughout the 90s.

But subcontinent wins are pretty rare for touring sides - for whatever reason. Only "great teams", ie Windies in 80s, Australia last few years have won series there recently - so it might be an unfair criteria for picking a 'number 2' side - if any of the candidates were that good, they'd be number 1, or tied with Australia. It does underline how good Australia has been in recent years - I do not buy the argument that all the other teams are down.

 

[IndianByHeart]

You were the one who brought up the competitive thing up though.

Now when it's been shown to be wrong you decide it's irrelevant!

I never brought it up, i responded in negative to someone's claim that they were competitive!

 

[IndianByHeart]

But subcontinent wins are pretty rare for touring sides - for whatever reason. Only "great teams", ie Windies in 80s, Australia last few years have won series there recently - so it might be an unfair criteria for picking a 'number 2' side - if any of the candidates were that good, they'd be number 1, or tied with Australia. It does underline how good Australia has been in recent years - I do not buy the argument that all the other teams are down.

I think you will find teams like SA, and even Eng (the one captained by N HUssain) winning the series in Pakistan.So winning over there is not all that difficult.

 

[IndianByHeart]

I think if England beat India in third test match and manage to draw the series, then they can be considered as the second best team, however if they loses the third match then it will be hard for anyone to label England as the second best team

 

[Jono]

well their results since at least their home series vs England (when for me they started their revival) haven't showed any big series win againts any major side. But they impressed a great deal down in australia even though they lost 2-0 & are building back the kind of test side that made them so successful between 1999 - 2004, so for me i would rate their chances of being #2 again right up their with all of them.

Yeah but they keep losing. Lost to England, lost to India, lost to Australia.

They are a good team, but you've gotta win some games too.

 

[Jono]

But, they did tie India 1-1 in an away series

When was this?

 

[viktor]

Show me where I've been making it up as I've gone along?

You said that England was #2 and then a couple of posts later appeared to deny it. That gave the impression that you just wanted to oppose what silentstriker said, regardless of whether it was right or not.

 

[Sanz]

But subcontinent wins are pretty rare for touring sides - for whatever reason. Only "great teams", ie Windies in 80s, Australia last few years have won series there recently - so it might be an unfair criteria for picking a 'number 2' side - if any of the candidates were that good, they'd be number 1, or tied with Australia. It does underline how good Australia has been in recent years - I do not buy the argument that all the other teams are down.

SA beat India in India in 2000, NZ drew the series in 2003-2004 and there were by no means great teams.
SA, Ind, SL, Aus, Eng and Zim won series in Pakistan in the last decade, NZ drew one.
Eng, Aus, Pak have won series in SL, NZ and SA have managed to draw.

Only In India, it is, that not many countries have had the success in last 15 years or so and I would say in the 90s and early 2000s it was due to the spin friendly pitches we used to make, but in last few years India has offered very sporting wickets to visiting teams and hence I expect them to at least draw series, if they want to be a legitimate no. 2.

 

[HowsThat]

I think there is "no clear nuber two" right now.India has an edge over England but thats a slight one.

 

[aussie]

Right, but you can't give them an equal chance, or say that 'right up there' with the rest, if they keep losing series....

They may be a team thats building, and eventually may challenge for the #2 spot...but you are speaking purely from a potential standpoint and not from any results. All the other countries on that list either have won recently, or are in the process of winning a series. And in the case of Pakistan, they have beaten the other two contenders quite handily. So, I don't see how you can rate SA as having an equal shot.

Now, if they manage to beat Australia in the current series....well then you may have a point.

Fair enough, but i strngly believe though once they start winning major series they have a better all-round team that either India or Pakistan to be 2nd best.

 

[silentstriker]

Fair enough, but i strngly believe though once they start winning major series they have a better all-round team that either India or Pakistan to be 2nd best.

Actually, I probably agree with you. In terms of talent, they very well could be the #2 side. However, I can't say that they have an equal shot because the other teams are already winning, while SA could win.

 

[Swervy]

I think there is "no clear nuber two" right now.India has an edge over England but thats a slight one.

that edge is simply home field advantage

 

[HowsThat]

Its difficult to arrive at a conclusion as to which team is number two.

It will be interesting to see how England perform against Pak at home and then later defend the Ashes.If England crush Pak and give Australia a hard time on their home turf, then i guess England would be regarded as number two team.

 

[honestbharani]

Well, thats the problem for them. They may have the second best team on paper, but that's all it is. India should have an absolutely dominant batting order on paper, but we all know how that works out outside the subcontinent. But, they did tie India 1-1 in an away series. So, I would put them as right behind the trio of India/Pakistan/England. They too can catch up, but they need to do a little bit more than the other three.

no they didn't.

 

[LongHopCassidy]

It may be difficult to see now, but England are easily the best positioned of any of the debated nations of becoming number 2. England are unique in their depth in pace bowling, which is something that no other nation in the world can lay claim to. And since pacemen make up the majority of a bowling line-up with a possible four (a sane limit for spinners in a team is 2) bowlers fit, firing and reverse-swinging, anything is possible.

However, England has by far the least reliable batting of the elite nations, especially away from home. However, I expect this to dissolve over time with the development of Bell, Cook and Pietersen.

There, I said it.

 

[luckyeddie]

When was this?

Never, in a word.

There's never been a drawn series between the two countries - home or away.

 

[Autobahn]

Never, in a word.

There's never been a drawn series between the two countries - home or away.

Well there's been no drawn test series but the guy must mean the recent ODI series which was drawn 2-2.

 

[GIMH]

I think the problem with our batting is consistency, as everyone has said. Trescothick rarely lets us down but the same cannot be said of any of the others, but there is no doubts of the talents we have avilable to us. On our day with everybody fit and firing we are a side to be feared. We are in with a great shout of drawing in India, then we can go on to beat Pakistan comfortably at home with a bit of luck, I believe if these are achieved we can set our targets higher than being #2. Not saying we will achieve it, but if we were to beat Australia this year, then you couldn't really argue with victories home and away.

Alas, I am getting acrried away - but I do believe our #2 claim is the strongest