LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksWho is the number one side in the world right now? Can anything be taken from the series just finished in India? Seems to have raised more questions than it was supposed to answer.
Who is the number one side in the world right now? Can anything be taken from the series just finished in India? Seems to have raised more questions than it was supposed to answer.
Rest In Peace Craigos
2003-2012
SA came in with 100% resources. India managed to hold on with just 70% resouces or even less, without the spin dens. Definitely India for me. They may not have done 100% for meriting that. But SA did not either.Originally Posted by pasag
India. My reasons here. India tour of RSA later this year to be the decider.
Last edited by Pratters; 18-02-2010 at 06:34 AM.
Kinda agree with Pasag here. Still No Clear cut winner. India have holes in its bowling, SA in their batting. Infact looking more closely, Aussie team looks more balanced right now.
It does, but they lost when they played us last time and we haven't met this Aussie side there yet..
We miss you, Fardin. :(. RIP.
A cricket supporter forever
Member of CW Red and AAAS - Appreciating only the best.
Check out this awesome e-fed:
PWE Efed
I dunno - beating WI & Pakistan at home doesn't cope for being the only side apart from WI & NZ to lose in England in the last 3 years.
It's going to be this way for a while, isn't it? A couple of years ago, most of us were saying that there wouldn't be an outstanding side for a while, and that's exactly where we're at. Perhaps SA look the strongest long term bet if Petersen turns out to be a genuine test opener & Parnell lives up to expectations. But on another day I could argue for India if a couple of their quicks step up to the mark, or Aus if neither of the above happen.
Aussie side look balanced but lacks resources to take down a batting lineup that of India. SA have a one man army in Steyn.
Have said it a few times now - anyone claiming there's any team who can claim to be number-one from the 2007 season to the present 2009/10 one is making unrealistic claims.
There's no way that we can conclusively say there's a "best" team around since the end of Australia's era in the 2006/07 Ashes. Same way we couldn't say there was any clear "best" from 1986/87 until 1996/97, same way there are plenty of other periods where the same applies in Test history.
All of India, South Africa and Australia are essentially on level-pegging, and are vulnerable too to the likes of England and Sri Lanka.
RD
Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
(Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006
Best way to prove who's best is to sim it out.
5 test series home and away all three playing each other on ITC. Who is simming?
Technically India, but they're so close these days that I don't think you can objectively say India are the best team. The ICC system doesn't really mean much at this stage.
Me IMO.
~ Cribbage
I dont understand why people can clearly put India on the top. Rankings are just rankings, I think South Africa, Australia and India are right up there. I dont see any international side walking up to face the Indian bowling line up and feeling the least bit threatened or intimidated. Their batting line up I think is easily the best in the world though but its really potent strike bowling that wins test matches in the long haul.
It's tough.
On paper? South Africa.
On results? India.
Long-term Depth? Australia.
Not too far off? England.
India in South Africa will be important. South Africa didn't help themselves by not beating England at home.
It never does. It's a rolling thing. Series results only get replaced when another series between the same teams at the same host country happens instead of it.
The reality, though, is that teams have very specific finite "terms". A team is only as good as the players within it, and the fact is that the calibre of teams go up and down, because players get better and worse, and come and go, and there is no way to ensure that this happens at the same time for each team.
Thus the best way to look at who is best is to use human initiative, not a fixed mathematical calculation.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote