''England is no.1 test team''

[Bun]

Stephen Brenkley: World rankings are wrong, England are already No 1 - Cricket, Sport - The Independent

By beating a lower ranked Australia and by winning 1 test against an under strength Indian team, Stephen Brenkley reckons England are already no.1 in the world, regardless of the official rankings.

My view is that it's premature and biased. Of course if they win by a margin of 2 to seal the series, they will be no.1, no doubt.

 

[Spark]

Of course it's biased, but opinions are always biased.

Except mine

 

[centurymaker]

england are no.1 !! haterz can get lost.

 

[Xuhaib]

Even if England win the series they are not number 1 because I don't see this side beating or drawing with India in India and that would make them undisputed numero uno.

 

[GIMH]

Was a great article until he put Dhoni in his World XI

 

[GIMH]

Even if England win the series they are not number 1 because I don't see this side beating or drawing with India in India and that would make them undisputed numero uno.

So who would be number one then?

 

[Xuhaib]

there is no undisputed number one in this era England imo has the most potential out of India,Eng and SA but at the moment all 3 are part of the same pack.

The great Windies and Aus teams were undisputed number one's because they were dominating most sides both home and away

 

[centurymaker]

you have to beat everyone to be no.1 facepalm-

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Even if England win the series they are not number 1 because I don't see this side beating or drawing with India in India and that would make them undisputed numero uno.

So India lose to England and remain number 1 is that not exactly the same thing?

Surprising article for a broadsheet in a way. More the sort of stuff a red top would come out with.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I think there's been altogether too much counting of chickens from some corners of the English cricket media after one test of a four game series. Yes, India looked underdone, overweight and still can't field but plus ça change plus c'est la même chose, eh?

Let's not forget that, but for the weather intervening with nearly half the final day still to be bowled, England would have won at Lords in 2007 too & look how that ended up.

England rightly favs for the series, but the potential for egg on face with this kind of statement is sizeable.

 

[hang on]

absolute nonsense from brenkley. the series has a long way to go. and the saffers are still around. the end of the current series will give one a better idea how things stand. but the winter is really when things will be really clear, what with the indians touring australia and the english touring lanka. and south africa will be playing australia, too, right?

 

[Spark]

I don't understand the idea that one has to be a clear #1 to be #1. Surely the very definition of #1 simply means you're better than the rest, but doesn't stipulate how much?

 

[marc71178]

Yes, pretty sure we've had that illogical argument a while back.

Just because there's no dominant side does not mean there isn't a best side.

 

[Jarquis]

aussie has clearly hacked a few accounts.

 

[Spark]

Yes, pretty sure we've had that illogical argument a while back.

Just because there's no dominant side does not mean there isn't a best side.

It's like saying Mt Everest is not definitively the highest mountain in the world because it's less than 3% taller than the next highest mountain. Sorry, but what?

 

[Jacknife]

I think there's been altogether too much counting of chickens from some corners of the English cricket media after one test of a four game series. Yes, India looked underdone, overweight and still can't field but plus ça change plus c'est la même chose, eh?

Let's not forget that, but for the weather intervening with nearly half the final day still to be bowled, England would have won at Lords in 2007 too & look how that ended up.

England rightly favs for the series, but the potential for egg on face with this kind of statement is sizeable.

I agree, I know it's their job to make head lines and right something controversial but some of these journos need to calm down till we've seen how this series plays out. If the same happens next week and England win, then should be the time to lord it a bit but not after one test.

 

[Bun]

yeah spork, england arent no.1 at the moment, repeat, at the moment, so there is really no need of such pronouncements to the contrary, in a respected broadsheet like independent. poor form from brenkly.

 

[91Jmay]

Allan Donald also said he thinks we are the best side in the world and very interestingly said we have the best bowling attack.

I don't think we are until we beat India though. If we do that i don't really see any justification for us not being the best.

 

[wpdavid]

It's like saying Mt Everest is not definitively the highest mountain in the world because it's less than 3% taller than the next highest mountain. Sorry, but what?

Cute but flawed, imo: I'd suggest that there's rather more variables regarding the quality of cricket teams than the height of Mt Everest et al. When teams are as close as the top 3 right now, would England creeping ahead if they win this series by two games make them definitively the best side? I reckon not, although I know others will differ. They might be, but these points are so easily skewed by timing of the fixtures, the weather, injuries etc that I don't think we can be definitive unless there's clear daylight after the top side.

I've long argued that having a league table to identify the best side is either pointless (see WI 1980-1995 and Aus 1995 to 2008) or meaningless (as at present). Happy to be in a minimum of one though.

 

[weldone]

England is no. 3 test team currently according to ICC rankings.