Print

[Jagminder]

I have to say that if there was a record for the worst number one rated team in cricket history - the fight between Eng and India would be pretty close...

I second that. LOL
Don't see a single team winning around all over the world.
Most teams are great with home advantage.

[Manormanic]

Quite true.  Be interesting to see combined away records of all teams over the past four years.

[Vic Nicholas]

Odd that you disagreed with me when I said precisely teh sam about our batting some four months ago Vic!  I'm not convinced KP is past it in the way that Strauss maybe is, but there are certainly two to three slots up for grabs in the top six.  My theory is that England are hoping to stretch it out until the end of the Summer with most of what they have now with a view to then blooding Ben Stokes as a number 6/7 who can also get through a share of overs as a third seamer.

Where I disagree is in your assessment of the relative merits of the England and Yarpie attacks.  Anderson is nearly as good as Steyn and certainly better than Philander who, electric start notwithstanding, is very good rather than future great.  Broad, if he pitches it up, is probably just about worth a slot alongside Bresnan and of course Finn and Tremlett give depth.  Far greater depth than SA have presently - De Lange is their fourth seamer and he is definitely uninispiring at this stage!

Last Northern summer I was still of the belief that Pietersen was one of the best five batsmen in the world who was just going through an unsually long tough patch. Now, I am starting to think that his best days are behind him, and while he can still produce the odd magic innings still, he is unlikely to sustain it for a whole series.

Strauss is 36 - so no shame that he is reaching the end of an excellent career. Age catches up to everyone.

On your point of de Lange being "uninspiring", you clearly have never seen him bowl, or you are an extremely tough judge of young talent. We are talking about a 21 year old who took a 7 for on debut FFS! I *did* watch him bowl, and he looks to have all the tools. Height - check. Pace - check. Accuracy - check. He is easily as good as Finn and not too far behind Tremlett who is a decade older.

Anderson as good as Steyn? Not in my - or anyone elses - universe. Steyn stands alone as the best fast bowler in the world BAR NONE in the last six years. A bowling average of 23 in a batsman friendly era puts him up there with the all time greats of the game. Anderson is not in the same class. Will not be considered up there with the great English fast bowlers let alone the all time greats.

Philander will do very well in English conditions with his line, length and movement both ways off the pitch. He is indeed a VERY good bowler and his stats back that up. Is he better than Anderson? Only time will tell I guess.

Kallis is better than either Broad or Bresnan - no contest there as Kallis is up there with Sobers as the best allrounder of all time.

Morne Morkel is good...in the same catagory as Broad.

Only in the spin bowling department do England have the decisive advantage with Swann and Panesar being better than anything the Saffers can throw up.

England have the better batsman keeper as well.

It is certainly going to be an interesting series!

[A-Swing-And-A-Miss]

Strauss isn't doing too badly tbh. He hasn't got any big scores in a long while, but he has put in lots of consistent 20's and 30's, much better than Cook who will get one massive score then get tons of very low scores before getting another giant score(He has scored single figure scores in 5 of his last 8 innings'..)

Anderson doesn't have the same explosiveness as Steyn, but I think it would be harsh not to put Anderson up with some of the greatest England fast bowlers as he is an excellent fast bowler and has led our attack very well for many years. Haven't seen enough of Philander or de Lange to really comment on either of them.

It is difficult to compare Kallis to Broad and Bresnan, as Broad and Bresnan are bowlers who are capable with the bat, whereas Kallis is a batsmen who is capable with the ball. Broad is slightly better than Kallis in terms of bowling, but Kallis is far superior with the bat which makes him overall a better all rounder.

England have better spinners than South Africa, but(as we have proved recently against Sri Lanka and Pakistan) South Africa are better at playing spin than England which balances it out.

Should be a great series, and will be interesting to see how the South African 2nd XI deal with the main South African team in English conditions 

[Vic Nicholas]

Strauss isn't doing too badly tbh. He hasn't got any big scores in a long while, but he has put in lots of consistent 20's and 30's, much better than Cook who will get one massive score then get tons of very low scores before getting another giant score(He has scored single figure scores in 5 of his last 8 innings'..)

Anderson doesn't have the same explosiveness as Steyn, but I think it would be harsh not to put Anderson up with some of the greatest England fast bowlers as he is an excellent fast bowler and has led our attack very well for many years. Haven't seen enough of Philander or de Lange to really comment on either of them.

It is difficult to compare Kallis to Broad and Bresnan, as Broad and Bresnan are bowlers who are capable with the bat, whereas Kallis is a batsmen who is capable with the ball. Broad is slightly better than Kallis in terms of bowling, but Kallis is far superior with the bat which makes him overall a better all rounder.

England have better spinners than South Africa, but(as we have proved recently against Sri Lanka and Pakistan) South Africa are better at playing spin than England which balances it out.

Should be a great series, and will be interesting to see how the South African 2nd XI deal with the main South African team in English conditions 

If Anderson ends up being rated an all time great English bowler with an average in the 30's, then we can truly say that English fans embrace mediocrity as their best friend.

Flintoff averaged 33 with the ball and took only three five fors, yet, is considered one of the greats of the English game. 

Maybe we have different expectations in Australia, but for a fast bowler, I would consider a final career average of under 24 to be "great", between 24-28 as "serviceable" and 28 and above as "mediocre".

Brett Lee has lower bowling average than Anderson, and he is not considered in anyones universe in Oz as a "great" In fact, he is considered a run of the mill fast bowler who never really hit the heights expected of him in test cricket.

Mitch Johnson who will probably never play test crocket again, also has a lower average than Anderson...and he is considered a major disappointment.

Both Siddle and Hilfenhaus average around 28 with the ball, but no one would seriously consider them as anything other than serviceable workhorses.

Different standards, I guess, but I will never be able to get my head around a fast bowler averaging 30 plus being called a "great".

[Alvaro]

I think English fans who know that cricket existed before 2005 do not consider Flintoff to be great.

[Manormanic]

On your point of de Lange being "uninspiring", you clearly have never seen him bowl, or you are an extremely tough judge of young talent. We are talking about a 21 year old who took a 7 for on debut FFS! I *did* watch him bowl, and he looks to have all the tools. Height - check. Pace - check. Accuracy - check. He is easily as good as Finn and not too far behind Tremlett who is a decade older.

Anderson as good as Steyn? Not in my - or anyone elses - universe. Steyn stands alone as the best fast bowler in the world BAR NONE in the last six years. A bowling average of 23 in a batsman friendly era puts him up there with the all time greats of the game. Anderson is not in the same class. Will not be considered up there with the great English fast bowlers let alone the all time greats.

It is certainly going to be an interesting series!

On De Lange, I fear the seven wicket bag was decieving.  He looks promising, yes, but as has been demonstrated evry other time apart from that one innings, he is not yet quite good enough for Test cricket.  Sure, in five years time he will be, but for now I stick by my judgement.

As for Anderson vs Steyn, you'll note I said that Jimmikins was close behind, no more than that.  I don't know whether he will be listed as an all time great here or anywhere - too soon to tell on that, and I personally think that there are far too many intangibles in that description to assess in advance - but I do think it fair to say that his overall career record is deceptive in terms of his ability in his peak years - which are those around now.  Bear in mind that his first eighty or so wickets came at over 40 each when he was young, poorly fast tracked and then messed up by bad coaching!

[A-Swing-And-A-Miss]

If Anderson ends up being rated an all time great English bowler with an average in the 30's, then we can truly say that English fans embrace mediocrity as their best friend.

Flintoff averaged 33 with the ball and took only three five fors, yet, is considered one of the greats of the English game. 

Maybe we have different expectations in Australia, but for a fast bowler, I would consider a final career average of under 24 to be "great", between 24-28 as "serviceable" and 28 and above as "mediocre".

Brett Lee has lower bowling average than Anderson, and he is not considered in anyones universe in Oz as a "great" In fact, he is considered a run of the mill fast bowler who never really hit the heights expected of him in test cricket.

Mitch Johnson who will probably never play test crocket again, also has a lower average than Anderson...and he is considered a major disappointment.

Both Siddle and Hilfenhaus average around 28 with the ball, but no one would seriously consider them as anything other than serviceable workhorses.

Different standards, I guess, but I will never be able to get my head around a fast bowler averaging 30 plus being called a "great".

Firstly, nobody ever claimed Flintoff was one of the greatest bowlers we have ever had, he certainly had the ability to be up there when he wanted and was a fantastic impact player(As proven in the 2005 Ashes) but was never consistent or reliable enough to be one of the best.

Secondly, Anderson has an average of 30.25 which is better than both Brett Lee and Mitchell Johnson so I have no idea what you are talking about there..

I guess it depends on what you class as great really, I mean there is no point comparing him to bowlers of 30-40 years ago because as you said yourself, this is a batsmen friendly era. But when compared to other England fast bowlers of the last 10 years or so, he has a good average. And there is ofcourse the point that Manormanic made in that his stats are effected by being poorly managed when he was younger.

Maybe he isn't a "great", but he has certainly done a fantastic job for his country and I doubt that England would have gotten anywhere near No. 1 if he wasn't leading the attack.

[kaustav]

Quite true.  Be interesting to see combined away records of all teams over the past four years.

So you do agree that India, albeit the poor team that they have been the last one year, is not England's 'sloppy seconds' like you claimed in another thread?

I think all of us are quite startled by the insipid performances from the last two number 1 teams...lol.

[Manormanic]

So you do agree that India, albeit the poor team that they have been the last one year, is not England's 'sloppy seconds' like you claimed in another thread?

Oh, I think that Australia beating India is definitely them taking our sloppies.  Thats a dig at Australia rather than India tho! 

[Dan W]

I think English fans who know that cricket existed before 2005 do not consider Flintoff to be great.

Massively.

[roco]

Having over 500 international wickets makes kallis a very good bowler in his own right let alone the 25,000 international runs and is 2nd only to sobers as greatest ever all rounder so no Englishman of modern times comes close

Steyn is better than jimmy but in England will be fun to see the battle with the swing

It's time for Strauss to go I think as cook is more than capable of skippering and will be the first Englishman past 10,000 test runs for me

Freddie was more than stats as he was a talisman who inspired teammates but only really in latter parts of his career

[legger123]

Question is, if Strauss was to go, who'd replace him at the top of the order?

[Vic Nicholas]

Oh, I think that Australia beating India is definitely them taking our sloppies.  Thats a dig at Australia rather than India tho! 

A dig at Australia?

When did Australia in it's period of being #1 did they lose four tests on the trot?

Actually, can you tell me when Australia last lost four tests on the trot from any ranking position?

Absolutely amazing some of you blokes...

[S Taylor3]

A dig at Australia?

When did Australia in it's period of being #1 did they lose four tests on the trot?

Actually, can you tell me when Australia last lost four tests on the trot from any ranking position?

Absolutely amazing some of you blokes...

Now now Vic the boys play nicely when you post your skewed pro Australia opinions so show them the same respect by allowing them theirs.

I've watched this forum for a few years and it is amazing how certain characters only seem to come out of the woodwork soon after certain events.