Pakistan v England Test Series *** Spoilers ***

e36Adz said:
Truth hurts doesn't it.

Anyway, let's hope THE NO 1 RANKED TEAM turn up for the second test. HA.
Click to expand...

Your response makes no sense. The truth doesn't hurt because I don't really care where England are ranked to be frank because these ranking systems tend to be absolute rubbish. I do care about winning series and playing good cricket.

e36Adz said:
I have to agree with that, the media do go into a frenzy over here at times. Before this series started all I've been hearing is 'the no 1 ranked side in the world' over and over and over again. My point was, people who watch cricket KNOW who 'the best' is and how good each and every team are.
Click to expand...

As you have now realised, the team have nothing to do with the peddling of the number one side rubbish. It does however sell papers and get more people watching cricket. In reality however, the England team have been fairly pragmatic about the whole thing and seem to recognise that the challenge is being consistent, regardless of rankings.

Your original post is the typical knee jerk reaction which I expect from the papers in the morning - build them up to knock them down.
 
England is the number 1 test team in the world at the moment. In terms of rankings, India is 2nd. In terms of performance, like I said before, I'd rank Pakistan 2nd.

1 test defeat doesn't change anything in this regard. However, it's been well documented that the England team has always struggled in the subcontinent. For them it's the final frontier.

For Australia, the final frontier was India and they managed to conquer it back in 2005. If England can conquer the subcontinent then we can call this team truly the best test team in the world. At the moment, I'd call them the no1 team, not the best test team.

Same with how India was a few months ago, the no1 team in the world, but their final frontier was South Africa. It was nearly conquered, but not quite, 1-1 in a brilliant series. So although India was the no1 team in the world, it wasn't the best test team in the world. This England side will be the best if the victories in the subcontinent are achieved.

And with regards to England going on about the no1 ranking: yes, I feel they go on about it. Dhoni and other Indians made it clear that the ranking itself wasn't as important as playing the good cricket that gets you there. Whereas in interviews, Strauss was making it quite clear he wanted England to go to the top of the ranking and he wanted everyone to consider his team the best in the world.
 
Last edited:
One More Solo said:
I see what you're getting at TC but your post doesn't really make sense. :D
Click to expand...

What doesn't make sense? :p

What I mean is this: the windies team was the best in the 70s and 80s because they absolutely dominated everyone else. The same with Australia from the 90s to the 2000s.

India dominated at home, and won away series in Windies, England, Sri Lanka and New Zealand. But they were never able to truly dominate away from home, and they never won in South Africa or Australia.

It's the rankings that make you no1, it's the domination that makes you the best.
 
TheCenturion said:
What doesn't make sense? :p

What I mean is this: the windies team was the best in the 70s and 80s because they absolutely dominated everyone else. The same with Australia from the 90s to the 2000s.

India dominated at home, and won away series in Windies, England, Sri Lanka and New Zealand. But they were never able to truly dominate away from home, and they never won in South Africa or Australia.

It's the rankings that make you no1, it's the domination that makes you the best.
Click to expand...

Just the being number one in the world doesn't make you the best team bit. :p I figured what you meant is being number one doesn't necessarily make you a great test side, in terms of history. :)
 
e36Adz said:
When Australia were at the top, irrespective of any rankings everyone knew they were the best team in the world, they didn't need to keep reminding people. For along time India had the best batting line up, again it was obvious to everyone who watches cricket, they didn't need to go on and on about it. I think Englands downfall may be that they are more concerned with reminding people that they are ranked no 1, rather then actually being focused on playing cricket.
Click to expand...

Of all the possible reasons I have heard for England doing poorly, this is by far the most stupid.

I don't remember the England team coming out boasting about being number 1(Apart from Cook in the SS adverts but they don't count..). The media did the boasting.

What turns a good team into a great team is not the way they play in favorable conditions when all is going well, but how they play when things aren't going their way.

England haven't had their backs up against the wall very often since Strauss took captaincy, the only time I remember was against SA and we got a 1-1 draw. These next 2 test matches will decide if England are a great team able to go abroad and get results, or if they are a decent team who can only play well in England...

And who said Test Cricket was boring?
 
One More Solo said:
The truth doesn't hurt because I don't really care where England are ranked to be frank because these ranking systems tend to be absolute rubbish. I do care about winning series and playing good cricket.
Click to expand...

You said it.

One More Solo said:
As you have now realised, the team have nothing to do with the peddling of the number one side rubbish. It does however sell papers and get more people watching cricket. In reality however, the England team have been fairly pragmatic about the whole thing and seem to recognise that the challenge is being consistent, regardless of rankings.
Click to expand...

Again, I agree it's more the fans and the media constantly piping on about how they are the No 1 ranked side but sometimes this rubs off on the players and they can get complacent. Maybe this thrashing will bring them back down to reality and they will be more focused in the next game?

One More Solo said:
Your original post is the typical knee jerk reaction which I expect from the papers in the morning - build them up to knock them down.
Click to expand...

I've never built them up in the first place though, in my opinion they are a decent side, that's it.
 
TheCenturion said:
And with regards to England going on about the no1 ranking: yes, I feel they go on about it. Dhoni and other Indians made it clear that the ranking itself wasn't as important as playing the good cricket that gets you there. Whereas in interviews, Strauss was making it quite clear he wanted England to go to the top of the ranking and he wanted everyone to consider his team the best in the world.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
Right, here's the thing. Let's put England in the following situations away to:
WI - I'd back them to roll them over, forget 2009, this team has moved on
Bangladesh - Been and done
Australia - Been and done
SA - Tough call, Draw
NZ - surely they would win
SL - They've been disappointing of late, we'll find out soon enough but i'd fancy England to win
India - This is tough again, I would say lose but if they were to play India right now?
UAE - I think they might be able to draw, but we shall see.

So basically, is there another team out there who would be able to do so well in all those different conditions? If not, then surely that makes England the best team, under any sensible definition of "best" :confused:
 
oli collett said:
.

So basically, is there another team out there who would be able to do so well in all those different conditions? If not, then surely that makes England the best team, under any sensible definition of "best" :confused:
Click to expand...

My bad, like I said before, I meant a great test side. England has the potential to be, but needs to win in the subcontinent.

Also India playing at home is a fortress, it will be a very tough challenge for England to win there.
 
'Been and done' is one thing, but being able to do over and over again is something else entirely. Again, the WI team of the past and the Aus team of more recent years, were dominant forces in the game.

England atm have a decent side who have had a great run, I don't think they got to the No 1 spot without playing anything but good cricket, but to be recognised as 'the best' they have to stand out of the crowd, head and shoulders above the competition, which they most definitely do not. In reality, I would say there are a handful of teams who are all equally good but that's just my opinion.

I think this current Pakistan side is very average overall, we have a great variety of spin but poor fielders, and average batsmen.
 
e36Adz said:
In reality, I would say there are a handful of teams who are all equally good but that's just my opinion.

I think this current Pakistan side is very average overall, we have a great variety of spin but poor fielders, and average batsmen.
Click to expand...

SA - always had a strong squad, but never had the 'killer' factor really.

SL - lost murali and malinga, but discovering some new talent in guys like Chandimal and Prasad. The next few years will be a struggle though.

India - had a couple of away series. Retarded setup is resistant to change, so no true indication of who will replace the big 3 (hint, it's Kohli, Rohit Sharma and Pujara) If they get their fingers out and do some proper management, then the loss of Tendulkar, Dravid and Laxman won't do too much harm, and Indian cricket will have a safe future.

Aus - future hangs in the balance imo. Need to find some more quality batsmen, and get them ready for Test level. Young energetic pace attack is very exciting though.

WI - Been down and out for years, but certainly showing determination under Darren Sammy. Got some good players, just need to get some consistency into their game and they can become a lot better.

With regards to Pak, I think they have a brilliant bowling attack. They have many quality bowlers like Riaz, Cheema, Junaid Khan, Umar Gul, Ajmal an d many more. Their batting attack, whilst not an aggressive lineup, is steady and can accumulate runs and build partnerships. They are going in the right direction under Misbah's leadership and have come leaps and bounds since that business in 05.

England are above the other teams, but only just. Pakistan v South Africa would be a good contest right now (but I can't help feel that Pakistan would get thrashed in SA and visa versa)
 
Last edited:
TC - Who are England playing next and who are Pakistan playing next?

Catching teams at certain times in certain conditions can give you an advantage, but I like I said, I do not regard this England team as head and shoulders above the rest. Now would be a good time to play SL, they are looking weak but I wouldn't like to play Aus with their new found pace attack which looks like it has real potential. Any team can beat any other team from the select few at the top in my opinion.

When there is a 'worlds best team', there will be no disagreements just as no one can ever dispute Australia were the worlds best for so many years, and that Wasim Akram was the best bowler of all time. ;)
 
Pakistan's next series is the asia cup (holders: India :D)

England is touring Sri Lanka (should be a good series, struggling team v a team that struggles in the subcontinent).

I don't think Australia is as dangerous as you make out to be. They're only bowling to India after all :(
 
TheCenturion said:
Pakistan's next series is the asia cup (holders: India :D)
Click to expand...

Oh great(!)

Actually that should be good, India's batsmen vs Pakistans bowlers has always been a good competition, and when anyone is playing against Sehwag you can't help but be a bit fearful. :eek:

TheCenturion said:
England is touring Sri Lanka (should be a good series, struggling team v a team that struggles in the subcontinent).
Click to expand...

I think Eng are currently much better then SL and will beat them even in SL.

TheCenturion said:
I don't think Australia is as dangerous as you make out to be. They're only bowling to India after all :(
Click to expand...

It will be interesting to see how they do in their next 2-3 series.
 
TheCenturion said:
My bad, like I said before, I meant a great test side. England has the potential to be, but needs to win in the subcontinent.

Also India playing at home is a fortress, it will be a very tough challenge for England to win there.
Click to expand...

Ah fair play - yes, but I've a funny feeling that if they did it would be put down to the Indian side being past it and what not! We shall see - it's a long way off yet and there's a lot of cricket to play first...
 
You know when Aussie won the ashes all those times, you never heard them gloat or boast about beating England did you!

lole36Adz
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom