where would england rank among the great sides of the past?

[subshakerz]

subshakerz, you're using the fact that Caddick and Gough (allegedly) had better stats than todays bowlers as proof that standards have fallen. You apply the same logic to the batsmen and show that standards back in the 90's weren't as high as they are currently.

My basic point is that guys like Caddick and Gough were considered a middle-of-the-road attack in the 90s yet now would be considered a top attack.

With batsmen, I can think of quite a few 90s batsmen who bumped up their average into the 50s in the 2000s, such as Jayawardene, Mohammad Yousuf, Kallis, Hayden, etc. Did they suddenly become much better players? Perhaps, but more likely is the fewer number of worldclass pace bowlers, the introduction of Bangladesh, and the flattening of pitches to account for the improvement in batting averages.

 

[Jacknife]

he did bowl well but to suggest that anderson could never hope to bowl that well is a bit much. never had u down as one for the johnny cakes, spark!

Completely agree, Jones bowled well but wow lets not get carried away and this is from one of Jones' biggest fans.

 

[DingDong]

did i jump the gun with this thread? india all over england atm in this test

 

[wpdavid]

did i jump the gun with this thread? india all over england atm in this test

Yes, although you weren't alone: quite a few CWers were being way ahead of themselves regarding this side. Whilst it's probably unwise to write them off just yet, this match has reminded us of some of their key weaknesses.

 

[Howe_zat]

This side does seem to have a pleasing habit of pulling something, anything, out of its arse to suddenly get back into it. Goes back to Cardiff '09.

 

[Uppercut]

The series has rather confirmed the suspicion that Australia and Sri Lanka made the batting look a fair bit stronger than it really is.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

The series has rather confirmed the suspicion that Australia and Sri Lanka made the batting look a fair bit stronger than it really is.

What about the bowling?

India supposedly a formidable batting unit yet to reach 300 in 3 innings and 2 of them on a placid Lord's track.

 

[Spark]

Mm, I've always been somewhat surprised when people have said the batting is the side's strength. It's always been the bowling for mine.

 

[centurymaker]

What about the bowling?

India supposedly a formidable batting unit yet to reach 300 in 3 innings and 2 of them on a placid Lord's track.

india are missing players. the whole batting order is messed up atm.
It's top heavy.

And good openers are so crucial in conditions like the ones you find in england.
(no sehwag and gambhir is proving costly )

Plus the lower order is doing nothing.

india's top 6 are still over-performing england's top 6. (without even taking into account the disparity in the strength of the bowling attacks)

 

[Xuhaib]

agree with Upper the batting has feasted on poor attacks in the last 2 series by the end of this series India will be comfortably outbatting this side hence it is so important for England to have a headstart in the seriews.

 

[Uppercut]

What about the bowling?

India supposedly a formidable batting unit yet to reach 300 in 3 innings and 2 of them on a placid Lord's track.

The bowling is awesome. There's a massive increase in the general standard of cricket when India come out to bat this series.

 

[ankitj]

where would england rank among the great sides of the past?

Nowhere

 

[Xuhaib]

yeah incredible to start calling them a great side all they have done is beat a below average Pakistan and middle of the road SL and Aus.

 

[GIMH]

Wins in Australia are very common of course, hence why it happens so often

 

[Furball]

Wins in Australia are very common of course, hence why it happens so often

Plus every team that goes there wins 3 Tests by an innings.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

The series has rather confirmed the suspicion that Australia and Sri Lanka made the batting look a fair bit stronger than it really is.

So how come England are now rattling along with a 150 partnership at 4.5 an over against the number 1 side in the world then?

Some shocking batting side we have.

 

[Daemon]

Because India's bowling is generally **** without Zaheer.

 

[smash84]

where would england rank among the great sides of the past?

Nowhere

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Because India's bowling is generally **** without Zaheer.

441-6 is a good effort though for a weak batting line up.

 

[centurymaker]

Plus every team that goes there wins 3 Tests by an innings.

how did you end up losing by an innings at Perth then?