• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Are England capable of being world no 1 in tests ?

pasag

RTDAS
No, because their bowling looks lackluster. Quality batting line-up, but unless England's bowling stocks rise, it's not going to happen, imo. Welcome to the forum btw.
 

Bob Bamber

U19 12th Man
I think England have fallen through bad selection of bowlers over the past year. I think If they can stay consistant , and keep their bowlers firing. They can easily challange Australia.
 

Salamuddin

International Debutant
Thanks mate. I can't see the subcontinental sides having any sustained levels of success simply because their boards are corrupt, inefficient and the structure of the game in those countries is poor - players are not motivated/pressured to excel.

England have improved their system a lot over the past decade and to seem the only country who have the infrastructure, professionalism and know how to match the Australians.
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
England aren't anywhere close to being at that level at present and don't look like doing so until they can sort their bowling out. They have a number of good batsmen, and even Dire Matty Prior looks a good bat now - but their bowling has left a lot to be desired for a while now. While watching them dismantle the West Indies for 100 odd, I couldn't help but think that Australia would have bashed them around giving how they were bowling. Sidebottom probably would have been attacked early and possibly mentally shattered - else, if he took a couple, he'd have been carefully played out. Harmison and Plunkett, despite getting good figures in the end due to the West Indian ineptitude, bowled at least two absolutely crap balls an over regularly.

South Africa are a bit the opposite - very good attack (minus a spinner, but it's not exactly complusory and Paul Harris doesn't look completely useless) but a fragile batting lineup. De Villiers who doesn't look to have the technique of a test opener, Amla who is just dire, Smith who Brett Lee troubles regularly and Gibbs who hasn't been particularly good against Australia in the past.

If South Africa and England looked to Kevin Pietersen to form some sort of bond and merged, they'd have a top team which I'm sure would be topple Australia, but it just doesn't work that way, obviously.
 

Tom Halsey

International Coach
Hoggard, Flintoff, someone else, and Panesar as the spinner isn't too bad an attack IMO, though it isn't enough to be the best in the world.

Need a 3rd seamer and Hoggard and Flintoff to regain fitness first...

(Would put Jones as 3rd seamer but he hasn't played a Test in two years and by all accounts hasn't been bowling well of late).
 

Salamuddin

International Debutant
England aren't anywhere close to being at that level at present and don't look like doing so until they can sort their bowling out. They have a number of good batsmen, and even Dire Matty Prior looks a good bat now - but their bowling has left a lot to be desired for a while now. While watching them dismantle the West Indies for 100 odd, I couldn't help but think that Australia would have bashed them around giving how they were bowling. Sidebottom probably would have been attacked early and possibly mentally shattered - else, if he took a couple, he'd have been carefully played out. Harmison and Plunkett, despite getting good figures in the end due to the West Indian ineptitude, bowled at least two absolutely crap balls an over regularly.

South Africa are a bit the opposite - very good attack (minus a spinner, but it's not exactly complusory and Paul Harris doesn't look completely useless) but a fragile batting lineup. De Villiers who doesn't look to have the technique of a test opener, Amla who is just dire, Smith who Brett Lee troubles regularly and Gibbs who hasn't been particularly good against Australia in the past.

If South Africa and England looked to Kevin Pietersen to form some sort of bond and merged, they'd have a top team which I'm sure would be topple Australia, but it just doesn't work that way, obviously.
South Africa's attack is only really THAT good on the high veldt.....
 

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Hoggard, Flintoff, someone else, and Panesar as the spinner isn't too bad an attack IMO, though it isn't enough to be the best in the world.

Need a 3rd seamer and Hoggard and Flintoff to regain fitness first...

(Would put Jones as 3rd seamer but he hasn't played a Test in two years and by all accounts hasn't been bowling well of late).
Of course, but Flintoff's fitness and that magical third seamer are oh so important to that - neither of which we've seen for a while. Harmison had a small period where he was a good bowler, while Jones had an even smaller period where he was an excellent bowler. At the same time, Flintoff had found consistent fitness and even balance-improving form with the bat. That's how they matched (and beat) Australia previously, but it really took a lot of moons to align for it to happen, and it hasn't been maintained since the series ended, nor has it even looked like happening again.
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
You from Westmead in Ireland or NSW, Kaiser? I'd normally assume the latter, but we've had quite a few Irish posters joining of late. Welcome onboard, anyway. :)

Personally speaking, I'd have to say no. There's something about the English mentality (& I don't know what, if anyone could identify it & recitify it they'd be a rich man) in all sports that makes us better at building towards one particular event than being able to maintain success over a long period. We got up to beat the Aussies in 2005, but I think anyone would have to say we've gone backwards since then. We might be able to get up there again, but to be able to sustain the performance needed to be no.1 over a period of time may just be beyond us.
 

cover drive man

International Captain
Englands bowling atack needs Simon Jones in my opinion. England havent been as good since the fourth test in 2005 since then the bowling attack has been absoloutely dire with the exception of one or two players who have been ok. The batting attack has also been having some problems, particularry in one day internationals were we are lucky if we can get two hundred runs. The whole team hasnt been as good as what it was for about two years now. Now and again we have the good perfomance in tests but only when we are against little teams like Pakistan and the West Indies and we struggled to beat Sri Lanka. Against top teams in tests and one day internationals we are absoloutely dire and when we face a good team they some to be a league ahead of us I hope the new coaches can make good change. So can England be number 1 in tests? No.
 
Last edited:

Salamuddin

International Debutant
Engalnd's batting could soon be the best in the world.

Collingwood, Pietersen, Bell and Cook....that's very, very solid. Need to plug a couple of holes but the core is there.

The bowling's a bigger worry tho......I don't know if Simon Jones will ever play for England again and if he does, will he hit the heights of Ashes 2005 again ? Flintoff is an excellent bowler but if he continues to be dogged by injury, England's title hopes will vaporize.
Hoggard is a decent workhorse but I can't see him leading an attack.....unless Harmison finds good consistency soon, England may have big problems taking 20 wickets.
 

gettingbetter

State Vice-Captain
As I said in a previous post, the fascination with the 05 Ashes team has got to go - I know Simon jones has been the only one mentioned, but inevitably, Tresco's name will come up too.

1. Tresco and Jones should not be in the Test team ever again

Cook, Strauss* and Vaughan can do the opening job quite well. Cook shouldn't be dropped from the Test team for the next 10-15 years (as long as he is in form), but just because he is the lowest rung on the ladder shouldn't give Tresco a free ride into the team. Vaughan's presence is worth 50 runs in itself and Strauss is simply a better opener than Tresco.

As for Jones, one good series doesn't warrant immediate iclusion either. Bolwers like Plunkett, Mahmood, Anderson and I guess now Sidebottom have shown that they are all capable at Test level - its just the fact that one of those bowlers need to be given an extended run in the team.

If a fully fit Flintoff can come back into the team, I think the batsman to make way should be Collingwood. The only other options are Bell or Strauss and both are better batsman than Colly, although it can be argued with Strauss. Bell on the other hand is in a similar situation to Michael Clarke - youngsters look up to him, doing well in the Test arena and possibly a future captain for the Poms.

Drastic action needs to be taken against Harmison - sure he can take the odd wicket against a weak Windies team, but he can't be dragged on for much longer. In conjunction with that, England need to persist with the 5 bowler strategy aslong as Freddie is fit.

England in the future (hopefully)

1. Cook
2. Strauss
3. Vaughan
4. Pietersen
5. Bell
6. Flintoff
7. Prior - or any other
8. Hoggard
9. Anderson
10. Panesar
11. Mahmood

As the article states, most of these players are in their prime (27-33) and by being together, they are only going to get stronger.

* Time will tell
 

PhoenixFire

International Coach
If everyone was fit, then I reckon a side of this could challenge the Aussies for the title.

1) Trescothick
2) Cook
3) Vaughan
4) Pietersen
5) Collingwood
6) Bell
7) Prior
8) Flintoff
9) Hoggard
10) Panesar
11) S Jones
 

simmy

International Regular
England's test batting is without question, exceptional. It is the bowling that is the worry. They are the only threat to Australia at the moment, and I feel that Ashes 2009 could be England's big chance to really threaten Aus dominance.
 

simmy

International Regular
If everyone was fit, then I reckon a side of this could challenge the Aussies for the title.

1) Trescothick
2) Cook
3) Vaughan
4) Pietersen
5) Collingwood
6) Bell
7) Prior
8) Flintoff
9) Hoggard
10) Panesar
11) S Jones
That team is VERY strong. Just swap Monty and Jones in the batting order though :D

Also, they are going to be a very hard side to bowl out twice with Flintoff batting at 8. Especially with people like McGrath and Warne retiring. Luckily for England I can't see them losing a test series at home in the near future, so they should remain a consistent international entity.
 
Last edited:

Flem274*

123/5
Englands bowling may not be brilliant, but Aussie's is probably going to have it's weakest in a long time shortly

Lee=crap test bowler
Tait=brilliant or horrible, will fluctuate between sessions.
Clark=excellent, maybe McGrath II
Watson=Not sure how good he'll be...
MacGill=pretty good from what I've seen but will he be there in 2009?
 

Aritro

International Regular
Lee=crap test bowler
Test average under 30 in the last year and a half (last time I checked) and seems to have finally discovered the ability to swing the ball.

I think he's going to emerge as one of the better Test bowlers in the world in the next couple of years.
 

Top