Are England capable of being world no 1 in tests ?

[Richard]

Gillespie's Pura Cup figures are worse than the rest? Including Kasprowicz? UIMM he's barely played for 2 years?

I've said it several times - yes, Gillespie did indeed have some making-up to do after his horrors of 2005. But I'd say he's done it now, and has done enough to suggest he's still a better bowler than Lee, Hilfenhaus or anyone else available. And that's all that should be coming into consideration.

 

[Matt79]

IIRC Gillespie and Kasper have been roughly equivalent in FC since the Ashes... and the point is that I don't think Gillespie suffered ONLY a lapse in form - I think his body isn't what it used to be, and I think his best now is simply not going to be as good as his best was. And thus, I think Lee is, and Hilfenhaus has the clear potential to, a better bowler than Gillespie.

 

[pasag]

People keep mentioning Gillespie. He's never going to play another test for Australia. You heard it here...

Yeah whether that's right or wrong, it's plainly the case.

 

[aussie]

They still can be. Obviously since the 2005 Ashes things have gone backward due to the masses of injuries to key figures in that series. But England still have the best crop of young batsmen coming up, only thing is that the bowling currently is not the same as 2005. But even if Simon Jones does really become England's version of Shane Bond an deprive England of having the most lethal 5-man bowling attack since who knows when, a 4-man attack of Hoggard/Harmo/Freddie/Panesar once all are bowling well added to a batting line-up currently on display plus Trescothick anyone with an high understanding of the game (and we have a lot of those on this site) has to agree has the potential to topple Australia as #1 in the world.

Damn the 2009 Ashes is really going to be off the top. Its going to be just like the 1995 Australian tour to the windies..

 

[aussie]

People keep mentioning Gillespie. He's never going to play another test for Australia. You heard it here...

Na, Dizzy will play at least another test again..

 

[aussie]

IIRC Gillespie and Kasper have been roughly equivalent in FC since the Ashes... and the point is that I don't think Gillespie suffered ONLY a lapse in form - I think his body isn't what it used to be, and I think his best now is simply not going to be as good as his best was.

I agree that Dizzy currently is not the same Dizzy that was bowling at his absolute peak years between 97-2004, but the experience that he has can't be taken for granted IMO. Firstly i don't think him & Kasper's form has been that equivalent since the Ashes especially given that Kasper has hardly bowled a ball since the Durban test last year, but anyway since the Ashes his record in AUS & ENG:

2006/07 in Australia

2006 in England

2007 in England (to date)

2005/06 in Australia

Hasn't been that bad to be totally written off of playing in Australia again. Especially given Australia have tours to the sub-continent next year where i think Dizzy's experience will be very useflu given the fact that Lee & Clark plus all the youngsters don't have much experience bowling on those flat pitches.

And thus, I think Lee is, and Hilfenhaus has the clear potential to, a better bowler than Gillespie.

Thats going over the top a bit, DIzzy at his peak was one of the best bowlers over the past 10 years, Lee even though has improved a lot since the 2005 ashes has a fair way to go match dizzy exploits at his best & to say so blatantly that Hilfenhaus even though he certainly seems to have the tools to do well at the highest level will become a better bowler than him is definately under-rating how good a bowler Dizzy was.

 

[Richard]

IIRC Gillespie and Kasper have been roughly equivalent in FC since the Ashes... and the point is that I don't think Gillespie suffered ONLY a lapse in form - I think his body isn't what it used to be, and I think his best now is simply not going to be as good as his best was. And thus, I think Lee is, and Hilfenhaus has the clear potential to, a better bowler than Gillespie.

I'm hoping Colin (^^^^) misinterpreted you there, and that you were only saying RIGHT NOW, not considering their whole career. Lee, IMO, will NEVER even come close to being as good as Gillespie was for all bar a tiny period of his career.

That aside, Gillespie's form in domestic cricket doesn't suggest to me that his body isn't what it used to be. He cannot possibly have bowled anywhere near as dreadfully as he did in 2005 since then, because that sort of bowling will be dispatched in club cricket. Therefore I'd say - given his loss of form in 2005 was, to me, completely inexplicable - that it was simply a very strange blip on the radar, and that were he to have worked his way back into the side in 2005\06 (and not just to play Bangladesh) he'd probably have picked-up where he left-off in 2004\05.

 

[GIMH]

They still can be. Obviously since the 2005 Ashes things have gone backward due to the masses of injuries to key figures in that series. But England still have the best crop of young batsmen coming up, only thing is that the bowling currently is not the same as 2005. But even if Simon Jones does really become England's version of Shane Bond an deprive England of having the most lethal 5-man bowling attack since who knows when, a 4-man attack of Hoggard/Harmo/Freddie/Panesar once all are bowling well added to a batting line-up currently on display plus Trescothick anyone with an high understanding of the game (and we have a lot of those on this site) has to agree has the potential to topple Australia as #1 in the world.

Damn the 2009 Ashes is really going to be off the top. Its going to be just like the 1995 Australian tour to the windies..

The thing is, chances are we'll never see Flintoff in a 4-man attack now

 

[Perm]

Na, Dizzy will play at least another test again..

I doubt it.

 

[gettingbetter]

They still can be. Obviously since the 2005 Ashes things have gone backward due to the masses of injuries to key figures in that series. But England still have the best crop of young batsmen coming up, only thing is that the bowling currently is not the same as 2005. But even if Simon Jones does really become England's version of Shane Bond an deprive England of having the most lethal 5-man bowling attack since who knows when, a 4-man attack of Hoggard/Harmo/Freddie/Panesar once all are bowling well added to a batting line-up currently on display plus Trescothick anyone with an high understanding of the game (and we have a lot of those on this site) has to agree has the potential to topple Australia as #1 in the world.

Damn the 2009 Ashes is really going to be off the top. Its going to be just like the 1995 Australian tour to the windies..

Ease up old boy - that is quite dramatic right there.

Hoggie - a workhorse, reliable
Harmison - poor away from home and even at home, is quite patchy
Flintoff - similar to Harmison in a sense (consistency wise)
Monty - getting better, but still not a 'force' compared with other spinners of now and yesteryear

I don't think adding Jones to the list will be a major focal point for the cricketing historians. Also, if they aren't/haven't been doing it with the four aformentioned players (+ Plunkett, Mahmood, Anderson, other), how does adding Jones to the line up change anything.

 

[Richard]

Adding Jones to the equation clearly could make a difference, because there has at least been a time - if fleeting - where he has demonstrated an ability to bowl better than Plunkett and Mahmood are, frankly, ever likely to be able to bowl.

In addition, to compare Flintoff to Harmison beggars belief. Flintoff has for quite some time now been able to do things Harmison has never, ever been able to do, with the ball, in addition to being for the most part infinately more accurate.

An attack of Hoggard-Jones-Flintoff-Panesar could, if all things were to fall into place, be a massively dangerous one which would have all bases covered. For all things to fall into place, however, would take a fair bit.

 

[marc71178]

Flintoff - similar to Harmison in a sense (consistency wise)

I'd say Flintoff is far and away our consistent threat, when fit.

 

[Pup Clarke]

So far ahead of Hoggard?.

 

[marc71178]

As a threat, yes.

Hoggard isn't as big a wicket-taking threat IMO, he's more of the controlling element.

My point was more at the comment that Flintoff is inconsistent!

 

[cover drive man]

As a threat, yes.

Hoggard isn't as big a wicket-taking threat IMO, he's more of the controlling element.

My point was more at the comment that Flintoff is inconsistent!

I think Hoggard is a wicket taking threat (Not as much as Flintoff) But he is a threat.

 

[Richard]

Haha, yeah, of couse he is. But Flintoff has the potential to be a threat in a wider range of conditions than Hoggard. Clearly, Hoggard is at his most threatening (and much more so than Flintoff) with a ball in good condition (and ideally on a cloudy day), swinging conventionally.

When it's not, though, and especially on quicker pitches where things like slower-balls and cutters are less receptive, Flintoff has more weapons at his disposal. Flintoff is taller, and has bigger hands, so is generally able to make the ball talk more. And, of course, he is a very capable reverse-swing bowler, whereas Hoggard is nothing more than modest in that area.

 

[gettingbetter]

If I'm not mistaken, it was you Richard who said something along the lines that Jones has only had a good Ashes series and thats about all in his career. If I'm not mistaken, thats was only 4 Tests. Mahmood had 4 pretty good Tests this time last year.

If you look at Harmison and Flintoff's careers overall, they are quite similar, a few poor patches and a few good ones - hence the comparison. Add to the fact that they have at one time or another, been the spearheads of their bowling attack, I can't see why a comparison cannot be made.

An attack of Hoggard-Jones-Flintoff-Panesar could, if all things were to fall into place, be a massively dangerous one which would have all bases covered. For all things to fall into place, however, would take a fair bit.

I agree, but the fact of the matter is that the previous poster referred to this attack in the same league as the Windies of the 80s, Australia's McGrath-Lee, Gillespie-Warne attack and others which I think is absolutely ludicrous.

 

[GIMH]

Ease up old boy - that is quite dramatic right there.

Hoggie - a workhorse, reliable
Harmison - poor away from home and even at home, is quite patchy
Flintoff - similar to Harmison in a sense (consistency wise)
Monty - getting better, but still not a 'force' compared with other spinners of now and yesteryear

I don't think adding Jones to the list will be a major focal point for the cricketing historians. Also, if they aren't/haven't been doing it with the four aformentioned players (+ Plunkett, Mahmood, Anderson, other), how does adding Jones to the line up change anything.

 

[gettingbetter]

Better strike rate, better average.

What exactly is irking you?

All players go through form slumps and currently Harmison is in one (whehtehr he will get out of it is another question). Flintoff has only been a competitive international cricket for 2-3 years and he is clearly depicted more than he is worth due to the 2005 Ashes - bollocks that he is one of the best all-rounders since 1990. (OT, but I know plenty of English fans who claim this.)

 

[Richard]

So exactly how many better are there, then? Flintoff has been a fine all-rounder for nearly 4 years now. Since 1990 there have been Cairns (when off the operating table), Kallis (for a time) and... who else exactly?