• 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.

Best Attacks / Batting Line ups in World Cricket presently?

hendrix

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
Don't particularly rate Rehman away from home, to be honest. There's that other veteran spinner they have who's better.
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Agent Nationaux said:
I would rate the English batting higher than what PEWS has given them.
Click to expand...
Yeah it's really hard with England because Ballance has only played one Test and both Robson and Moeen are yet to debut at all. I think I'll be moving them up soon but there's just too much unknown there.
 
S

social

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Australia's bowlers have just done a number on England (home) and SA (away) so I struggle to see how their attack can be any worse than 2
 
Migara

Migara

Cricketer Of The Year
harsh.ag

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Since Aussie bowling attack is based on how far Johnson can take his form, I am going to place them in a Schrodinger type 2nd-3rd rank, alternating with NZ. England 4th.

And putting the Indian batting below that of Pak is ludicrous.
 
Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
The Aussies also have Ryan Harris, Peter Siddle, Nathan Lyon and Shane Watson. I think their attack is number one right now because it has world class fast bowling and a good spinner.

When Rhino and Mitch retire they will take a hit if Patto, Cummins and Starc don't pull it together immediately but right now they're the best imo.
 
hendrix

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
Agree with Flem. Johnson goes, they bring back Siddle as trusty third seamer and operate with Harris and Pattinson. Or bring in Bird or Starc.

They also have Lyon and Watson. Steve Smith is probably a better leggie than Sodhi, too.
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Yeah it's madness to compare New Zealand's bowling attack with Australia's. Even without Johnson, Australia are still comfortably better overall due to how much better Lyon is than Sodhi and the fact that Australia have about ten bowlers better than Wagner. I've been on the "New Zealand have quite a good attack" bandwagon longer than most but Australia's is clearly better.
 
Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
Prince EWS said:
Yeah it's madness to compare New Zealand's bowling attack with Australia's. Even without Johnson, Australia are still comfortably better overall due to how much better Lyon is than Sodhi and the fact that Australia have about ten bowlers better than Wagner. I've been on the "New Zealand have quite a good attack" bandwagon longer than most but Australia's is clearly better.
Click to expand...
I agree with everything bar the bolded. Either you're exaggerating, you don't rate Wagner at all or you're wrong.:p
 
hendrix

hendrix

Hall of Fame Member
Prince EWS said:
Yeah it's madness to compare New Zealand's bowling attack with Australia's. Even without Johnson, Australia are still comfortably better overall due to how much better Lyon is than Sodhi and the fact that Australia have about ten bowlers better than Wagner. I've been on the "New Zealand have quite a good attack" bandwagon longer than most but Australia's is clearly better.
Click to expand...
There was a time, just before Australia went to England last year when you might've been able to justify NZ's attack being better on paper. Siddle was Australia's form bowler. Ryan Harris and James Pattinson were both coming back from injuries - it was particularly unclear whether Harris would be the same bowler. Starc was - and still is - prone to erraticism. Lyon had gone through the customary dropping. It really wasn't clear what bowlers Australia would pick, and what roles they'd occupy.

At the same time, critics were still optimistic about Doug Bracewell turning out to be a good bowler, either deposing or complementing Wagner. It looked like Southee, Boult, good Bracewell, and potentially a returning Vettori would make up the core of the attack.

Of course:
- Harris turned out to be just as good if not better than pre-injury
- Pattinson continued to impress
- Bird emerged
- Lyon convinced the selectors to give him some games
- They picked Mitchell Johnson
- All the bowlers appeared to understand and settle into their roles.
- Vettori died and NZ picked Sodhi
- Bracewell was crap
- Wagner was largely crap
 
Last edited:
Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
Doug Bracewell, now there's a candidate for "ten bowlers better than...", even in his own country. How times have changed.:(
 
D

Dan

Hall of Fame Member
Flem274* said:
Doug Bracewell, now there's a candidate for "ten bowlers better than...", even in his own country. How times have changed.:(
Click to expand...
Called it from the beginning, and I distinctly remember you refusing to accept that Bracewell would inevitably become crap :p

1. Southee
2. Boult
3. Wagner
4. Henry
5. Gillespie
6. Milne
7. Small
8. Wheeler
9. Bennett
10. Kuggs
[...]
Bracewell
Ellis
 
D

Dan

Hall of Fame Member
Well replace Kuggs with one of Arnel, Alderidge, McKay, or a jammy medium pacer like KNB or CdG who are ridiculously overpowered in NZ domestix.

Kuggs returned better figures than Dougeh in the Plunket this year, tbh. Not just the agribusiness connection getting him a mention.

I still maintain Bracewell is completely ****, so I'd probably have all of the above rated ahead of him tbh. I figured putting him at 20th behind the likes of Matt Quin would be taking the piss a bit though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top