just said same, never known an england team so ruthless, i said we were best before this series, but we still need to perform in the sub-continent to prove it to the rest
defo 100% agree this atyack is something different. one more test in england though aganist sa and then the tests will be away for the next years.
Hard to say. Great side, but playing against some of the weakest opponents in ages too. They've come good at the right time and could go on to dominate for a while, but a lot of that is because I can't see where the opposition will come from. Also, rankings only started in 2003, so being number one for the first time in something that's only existed for eight years doesn't really show us anything about the strength of teams that came before.
Different eras are impossible to compare to be honest. Completely agree about the current calibre of opposition though. Aside from South Africa the bowling lineups are as weak as I can ever remember. And let's see how they do on spin friendly or flat batting pitches. I still worry we're a bowler light against good opposition. Would this side have competed against the West Indies of old... i doubt it. Would it have competed against the Australia side of old... maybe.
Not sure about the windies of old but all though we'd never know, would have competed with the Aussies of the 90's. Regardless of the opposition, this is our best squad in years, we could lose a fast bowler or batter and put 1 straight back in, team spirit seems brilliant, only fault I could pick is has swann peaked or who could replace him if injured? None the less, this is the best England test team in donkeys
Raul dravid aka the wall said that this attack are relentless, they are one of the best attacks ive ever faced. they have all batted aganist good players so saying they couldnt aganist any attack isnt right. swanns had nothing to bowl on this summer.
Thinking of the windies... would they have been as effective in this day and age where you have more video footage and greater preparation and analysis? We also have slower flatter pitches reducing the pace they could bowl at, greater protection items for batsmen and the rules about number of balls per over at head height. Best team we've had in my lifetime for sure but I think we have to wait a decade or so to know how good this england side are.
The Windies didnt always bowl at head hieght tho`, they bowled bloody fast though. The really tall lads like Ambrose did get the ball up under the chin quite a lot, but bowlers like Roberts, Holding, Marshall were just the best bowlers in the world at the time. They had a side like we do now, untouchable, it came to an end and so will our domination, but lets enjoy will we can.
13 head height bouncers, aimed at the chin, in a row against England once. They were exciting to watch. Probably better than this England, but it is very difficult to compare with the game changing so much. I reckon this one has got to lay a claim to being the best England though. Maybe not the best players 1-11 but greatest team. If they can keep it up for 3-5 years then we will see.
I wasn't even thinking that far back. Three that stick in my mind was Walsh ambrose and Benjamin. I can remember watching them in the early nineties I think with possessed looks in their eyes. Every ball Walsh bowled was a dot ball. That's when cricket used to be on the free telly. Don't much care for it since it went posh.
No one complained about the Aussies being number one in the 90's early 200o's by kniocking over a shambles of an England side. You can only play what is in front of you and if you come up against four of the greatest batsmen ever and make them look (apart from Dravid) silly then you have to ask are they rubbish or are we making them look rubbish. The rankings have only been going since 2003, but the calculation have been applied retrospectively as well to work out historical league tables. England have been number one in the late seventies and mid eighties too according to the same algorithm.
Combination of both factors I'd suggest. We were ruthless against a dispirited and out of sorts Inidan side who, minus Zaheer Khan, have next to zero firepower in the bowling attack. We have an excellent side. Only South Africa come close in the calibre and strength in depth of the bowling, and only an on-form first choice Indian batting line-up - which they definitely weren't this series - can compare to ours. Fielding, we're pretty much untouchable. South Africa on their soil is the one genuine challenge I can see coming up. Even on sub-continent pitches we should still have way too much for India and Pakistan (although a second spinner to take some of the workload would be nice - Monty? Rashid?)
Agreed, if we can get a draw or even better a win in SA then that will truly show we are number 1. But, I think if you look at the test batting then you can see we are not 1 series wonders, we have our whole team bar Anderson in the top 90, even Ravi Bopara for gods sake. We have four players in the top 10. http://www.relianceiccrankings.com/ranking/test/batting/ We have 4 bowlers in the top 10 test bowling rankings and number 11 is Bresnan: http://www.relianceiccrankings.com/ranking/test/bowling/ We have earned and deserved this number 1 spot without doubt. Now we need to make it ours like the Aussies did and we need to be feared like the great WIndies sides.
Didn't the West Indies play in a time before helmets also? If batsmen had of had them then then I'm sure they'd have been less effective. Like everyone's said, impossible to compare properly.
We were fortunate to get that scoreline though, 2 last wicket draws. Not taking anything away from the team though as it was a fantastic result at that time and showed the spirit the team had then to fight until the end for the draw.
