• 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.

What worth are rankings anymore?

smash84

smash84

The Tiger King
Spark said:
It's pretty crazy. Swann's been tagged as underperforming over the last two tours despite averaging, what, 25 in the UAE?

Broad's averaging about 15 since the Lord's India Test and has been the victim of some appalling luck at times. Anderson's numbers aren't far off too.

That they keep losing is a testament to how staggeringly incompetent the rest of their team has been.

I mean they kept SL to about 500 runs in the Test. Generally speaking, on the subcontinent unless it's a serious turner (which this was nowhere near), you win much more of those than you lose... if you can bat.
Click to expand...
Jono said:
.

Really the bowlers ought to take a metal pole and smash the **** out of the fielders and batsmen who let them down.
Click to expand...
Pretty much sums up the story of the Pak side tbh
 
K

kingjulian

U19 12th Man
If my aunt had a penis, she would be my uncle...

We'll talk when Anderson takes wickets at "Philander speed"

Saffers, Australia, and Pakistan have a much better bowling attack. English supporters often cite the presence of Swann to justify that they somehow have a well rounded attack and therefore it is superior, but his average is slowly climbing up......batsmen don't really have too much problem against him now. It won't be long before he averages 35+...How good he is, is a moot point really. Because, English team still can't get a result in the countries where this all-round bowling attack is supposed to excel...

I still haven't forgotten how the opinion that this present England side is one of the all time greatest was shoved down....it will be mighty embarrassing when they eventually prove that they can't even hold on to the number one spot for as long as the team they ridiculed for being number 1.

English supporters tend to get carried away. "World class bowling attack" is just another case of over hyping...we have all seen this before a world cup of every major sporting event.

It's nothing new...I'm just saying...
 
Spark

Spark

Global Moderator
They have excelled ffs. Have you watched the cricket at all?

Anything to the contrary is abject rubbish and displays a fundamental lack of knowledge about how cricket works at best.
 
Last edited:
Furball

Furball

Evil Scotsman
England's string of defeats has nothing to do with the bowlers. In each of their last 4 Tests, they've dismissed the opposition cheaply enough to win all 4 with competent batting.
 
Spark

Spark

Global Moderator
Yeah precisely. In the second UAE Test they needed to chase 146. In the third they bowled Pakistan out for <100 on a pitch that frankly wasn't that helpful at all. I don't think Pakistan got more than 270 in the first Test either.
 
Furball

Furball

Evil Scotsman
Off the top of my head, England have conceded 400+ in 3 of their last 44 innings.

Being dismissed for less than 100 is actually a more regular occurrence than scoring 400 against them.
 
Spark

Spark

Global Moderator
Not much good if you can't bat obvs. They really have plumbed hitherto unseen levels of piss-poor in the last few months in that the department. It's the old adage - bowlers win games, batsmen lose them and England's have made a fine job of doing that.
 
K

kingjulian

U19 12th Man
36.33
39.21
43.17
52.44
45.27
37.47

That's the Test average of Pakistan top 7....in most innings..they struggle to make 300.

The problem you suggest that England have is the problem that Pakistan have struggled with for over a decade. They haven't really addressed it yet....so bowling them out is not really a proof of being a world class bowling unit. McWarne etc managed to bowl India out in the flat decks consistently...that to me is a world class bowling attack. I don't think the current English bowlers have it in them to do it against India in India...if they really were world class, they should have no excuse to not do it.

I didn't say they are average. I said they are above average. Because i can differentiate between a purple patch and truly exceptional talent....which a majority of English supporters seem incapable of doing when it is their team under the microscope.

Stop getting overly touchy and revert to "you don't know ****" type of argument...
 
Last edited:
Sparkley

Sparkley

Banned
Basically Pakistani bowlers and Herath get no credit for bowling well. When English batsmen get out for crap scores they get out because of their own mistakes. When England bowl other teams out it is because they were awesome. India were number one for close to two years. England will lose it to a far more deserving team in RSA in less than one year. Steyn, Philander and Morkel will comfortably outperform the English attack later this summer but that will be explained away by pointing out how rubbish England's batting is.
 
E

Expressway76

U19 Vice-Captain
kingjulian said:
I don't think England's bowling is as good as the hype machine would have us believe...

It's just above average...
Click to expand...

The England pace bowling attack's averages over the last 2 years have all been under or around 25.

That's James Anderson, Tim Bresnan, Stuart Broad, Steve Finn and Chris Tremlett.

So that's the frontline bowlers AND the second string all performing at a level any team would be happy with in all conditions/situations.


Yes Swann hasn't done as well but he's a spinner in England ffs, he's not expected to run through teams ala Murali.



Just above average... :laugh:
 
benchmark00

benchmark00

Request Your Custom Title Now!
What are the collective averages of the other attacks over the same period of time out of interest?
 
unam

unam

U19 12th Man
To answer the original questions. I would say ratings would be worth much more if teams play equal amount of cricket away and home and they play different opponents. Before touring England, India played way too much cricket at home, that is one of the reasons they became number 1. India in India have always been strong. also I am sure how the ratings take into account the fact that beating number 1 team is much tougher then beating number 8 team. what formula do they use?

if someone can provide insight on how the ratings are calculated we might be able to understand how much they are actually worth.
 
Last edited:
Sparkley

Sparkley

Banned
unam said:
To answer the original questions. I would say ratings would be worth much more if teams play equal amount of cricket away and home and they play different opponents. Before touring England, India played way too much cricket at home, that is one of the reasons they became number 1. India in India have always been strong. also I am sure how the ratings take into account the fact that beating number 1 team is much tougher then beating number 8 team. what formula do they use?

if someone can provide insight on how the ratings are calculated we might be able to understand how much they are actually worth.
Click to expand...
utter bollocks about india. They have historically sucked away from home but at one point in their number one reign they had won their last away series in eng, nz and wi and drawn with rsa and sl. They are arguably the best subcontinental side in terms of series won in countries outside home. They need RSA and Aus to complete the set, SL need Ind, RSA and Aus, Pak need Wi, RSA and aus.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top