I'm glad to see my prediction on the series is looking more likely. Right at the start I said 2-1 to England, with India winning at Edgbaston and the Oval test being drawn. It would take a lot for India to come back now.
So, if England win as expected here, are we now best in the World? I really do think we have a case for saying so, certainly the bowling has proved to me to be exemplary. I think we can compete in just about every situation now, bowling-wise.
I'm still not totally hooked on the batting and am unsure about Morgan - one more top-class batsman would solve that one. But am unsure as to who I would bring in - Bopara always looks nervy to me but could get the nod for the next test with Trott injured. Unless, as has been suggested, England bring in another fast bowler, but i think that is unlikely.
So, step forward (for me at least!) Rashid of Yorkshire. He can bat and bowl and (though not in terrific form this year) would give us an extra option. Thoughts anyone?
Best test side in the World now?
posted on 1/8/11
'2-1 would leave India as the best Test side in the world"...
In the official table, perhaps. But we know figures don't tell the full story. My betting is India will win at Edgbaston but it depends if they can get their bowling steadied
posted on 1/8/11
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 1/8/11
How is it subjective if you have just BEATEN the supposed number 1 in the world? If this was boxing then it would be England that are champions.
This 'test table' is arguable at best, its not the only measure of a team. Better by far to wait till the official team Championship in 2013.
posted on 1/8/11
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 1/8/11
The table has it's pros and cons, but it is the best way to gauge who's best in a game like cricket.
It's a shame we're not getting 5 tests, too much time devoted to ODIs.
In my opinion, you should play 5 tests against a top team, and 3 against a lower ranked team. Or, conversely, play 4 tests against everyone. The table is based on series wins, not individual match results. So a team playing a 3 match series can win the first match then play to no loose the next 2, thus making it harder for the other side to stage a comeback.
Oh, it's a can of worms...
posted on 1/8/11
'so what happens if England beat India, but then go ont to lose to Bangladesh..do Bangladesh become the worlds best cricketing nation??'
I guess that yes, they would - it can happen in World cricket. You are only as good as your last game.
Why does the table not lie? If we beat India 2-1 then, for you, India would still be the best would they? I guess that i'd have to differ on that.
posted on 1/8/11
"How is it subjective if you have just BEATEN the supposed number 1 in the world? If this was boxing then it would be England that are champions.
This 'test table' is arguable at best, its not the only measure of a team. Better by far to wait till the official team Championship in 2013."
This is not boxing. The table is a record of the last few years.
posted on 1/8/11
'This is not boxing. The table is a record of the last few years."
Duh, yes I know its not boxing. But the tables hardly indicative of current ability is it? Lets put it another way - supposing India go on a series win after this? Not sure who they are playing but suppose they win it 5-0 or something against poor opposition, and England just draw their next series (against stronger opposition). Is it really FAIR that England would be sitting below them in the rankings?
I guess you would say not. My argument was that I believe England to be the BEST team in the world on current form, statistics and how the team can perform over the next few years. Don't forget, India will lose many of their players shortly to retirement.
posted on 1/8/11
"'This is not boxing. The table is a record of the last few years."
Duh, yes I know its not boxing. But the tables hardly indicative of current ability is it? "
So why did you refer to boxing? A league table is used in sports like football, cricket, rugby, etc, and is a way of showing who is best over a period of time.
In your scenario, "Is it fair that...", well, that's have league tales work. Is it fair that a team beat Man Utd last year but are ranked lower than them? Yes, because that's how the league tables works - it is a cumulation of ALL the results.
posted on 1/8/11
'In your scenario, "Is it fair that...", well, that's have league tales work. Is it fair that a team beat Man Utd last year but are ranked lower than them? Yes, because that's how the league tables works - it is a cumulation of ALL the results..'
_-------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect, its not the same situation. We have teams here playing each other at different times for different durations (this is a 4 Test series for example, wheras we played Australia in 5 tests). Sometimes test tours are abandoned (as in the case of Pakistan)
How can you POSSIBLY compare this to a football league table, where everyone plays each other at home and away ? its just NOT the same! At least in boxing the result lies on who you played (fought) last not how many times you have played, when you last played etc etc. I believe that England play more test cricket than anyone else, should we be penalised for that? Its farcical!