best team in world cricket right now

[OverratedSanity]

Ishant Sharma has bowled better in the last two years than Tim Southee has and I'm not even trolling.

 

[smash84]

Agreed, ishant has grown a pea brain where there was none

 

[vic_orthdox]

If I wanted to pick a team that I think is most likely to win anywhere in the world at the moment, it's Pakistan. They have enough spin and enough pace bowling to take 20 wickets anywhere in the world at the moment - I'm not sure you can say that about the other attacks.

They'll probably have a batting implosion over a three/four game series, but can cover it enough of the time.

I'd then take England - with Stokes, Ali & Woakes, even if you have concerns about the quality of their main discipline, when combined with Bairstow it provides them with an asset that no other team has in comparison; and has been vital in winning them games of cricket for eighteen months now.

Throw a blanket over the rest of them.

On a separate note, I wonder what the coaching staff of Australia would be thinking now about the cancelled series against Bangladesh - whether or not they would have won the series, it would have been a chance to get some good experience into their batsmen in subcontinental conditions against bowling that isn't as good as that of Sri Lanka (well, at least Herath). These guys don't seem to have any faith in their own ability to find answers over time (particularly Warner, Khawaja and even Voges) which the Bangladesh series could have provided - at least some confidence at the end of the series like Smith and Marsh are getting now.

 

[Furball]

Reckon Wahab would be an absolute jet in a 5 man attack btw. Would be using him similarly to how Clarke used Johnson, just bowl short spells where you're just letting go as fast as you can and hit ****s.

 

[honestbharani]

If I wanted to pick a team that I think is most likely to win anywhere in the world at the moment, it's Pakistan. They have enough spin and enough pace bowling to take 20 wickets anywhere in the world at the moment - I'm not sure you can say that about the other attacks.

They'll probably have a batting implosion over a three/four game series, but can cover it enough of the time.

I'd then take England - with Stokes, Ali & Woakes, even if you have concerns about the quality of their main discipline, when combined with Bairstow it provides them with an asset that no other team has in comparison; and has been vital in winning them games of cricket for eighteen months now.

Throw a blanket over the rest of them.

On a separate note, I wonder what the coaching staff of Australia would be thinking now about the cancelled series against Bangladesh - whether or not they would have won the series, it would have been a chance to get some good experience into their batsmen in subcontinental conditions against bowling that isn't as good as that of Sri Lanka (well, at least Herath). These guys don't seem to have any faith in their own ability to find answers over time (particularly Warner, Khawaja and even Voges) which the Bangladesh series could have provided - at least some confidence at the end of the series like Smith and Marsh are getting now.

We think alike on this one. But I cant detail it out like you do, so end up posting 2 liners..

 

[honestbharani]

Reckon Wahab would be an absolute jet in a 5 man attack btw. Would be using him similarly to how Clarke used Johnson, just bowl short spells where you're just letting go as fast as you can and hit ****s.

Yep.. Will either get them out himself or play with them mentally enough to get the other guy a wicket. But issue is as we have seen with MJ already and with WAhab at times, it is just so very very hard to sustain.

 

[Adders]

If I wanted to pick a team that I think is most likely to win anywhere in the world at the moment, it's Pakistan. They have enough spin and enough pace bowling to take 20 wickets anywhere in the world at the moment - I'm not sure you can say that about the other attacks.

They'll probably have a batting implosion over a three/four game series, but can cover it enough of the time.

I'd then take England - with Stokes, Ali & Woakes, even if you have concerns about the quality of their main discipline, when combined with Bairstow it provides them with an asset that no other team has in comparison; and has been vital in winning them games of cricket for eighteen months now.

Throw a blanket over the rest of them.

Agree with this.

But I will add just in case there is anyone in any doubt about just how close it all is at the top.........Pakistan are comfortably in front in the poll and I think that's fair enough too. But would that be the case if there was a different result at the Oval?? I mean if this series had ended 2-1 or 3-1 to Eng I think we'd all still be recognising a fighting effort from Pakistan in a tough place to tour but I doubt many would be then claiming they've got their noses in front for the No1 spot.

So essentially it has come down to the result in 1 test match. Which again I don't disagree with and think is fair enough, but it does highlight how ridiculously close this all is.

This is going to be an interesting thread over the next few months/years for sure.

 

[Shady Slim]

Agree with this.

But I will add just in case there is anyone in any doubt about just how close it all is at the top.........Pakistan are comfortably in front in the poll and I think that's fair enough too. But would that be the case if there was a different result at the Oval?? I mean if this series had ended 2-1 or 3-1 to Eng I think we'd all still be recognising a fighting effort from Pakistan in a tough place to tour but I doubt many would be then claiming they've got their noses in front for the No1 spot.

So essentially it has come down to the result in 1 test match. Which again I don't disagree with and think is fair enough, but it does highlight how ridiculously close this all is.

This is going to be an interesting thread over the next few months/years for sure.

i agree with you on everything you said wholeheartedly

but you could also say the same about edgbaston, and if the 'stan winkled out a draw or even a win maybe they'd have ninety percent of the votes

 

[Adders]

Absolutely, so really it's not even about coming down to one test match.........a single session can change our opinions on how we're ranking these teams.

Which really is remarkable when you think about it. Has test cricket ever been so competitive??

 

[Black_Warrior]

^ Pretty much and that's what you get with such intense competition among the teams. If someone England manage to pull of a 2012 in India again (big if I know), then they would be well and truly above the rest. I have been thinking about this a lot recently and given the home advantage that everyone relies on plus weaknesses in all teams depending on conditions, I think what we should look at is the range of conditions a team is able to excel in.

For example, I really rated New Zealand from 2013 till 2015 (up to the Aus series) because they had demonstrated a tremendous range, draws in Asia, draw in England, wins in WI, plus home victories of course.

Similarly, South Africa at their peak showed tremendous range - England, Australia, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and draws in UAE and India.

England right now is still the team that has demonstrated a range similar to NZ in that period, and closes to South Africa's peak and India's peak before that.
They were extremely competitive in UAE, won in South Africa. This is as wide a range we can get today.

Pakistan have done their credentials a lot of good by drawing in England, but there are still question marks about whether this batting can hold up against extra pace and bounce of Australia or South Africa.

So both Pakistan and England have a very important series coming up this December. Both are expected to lose but if they can somehow surprise, they would be a tad higher than the rest.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Agree with this.

But I will add just in case there is anyone in any doubt about just how close it all is at the top.........Pakistan are comfortably in front in the poll and I think that's fair enough too. But would that be the case if there was a different result at the Oval?? I mean if this series had ended 2-1 or 3-1 to Eng I think we'd all still be recognising a fighting effort from Pakistan in a tough place to tour but I doubt many would be then claiming they've got their noses in front for the No1 spot.

So essentially it has come down to the result in 1 test match. Which again I don't disagree with and think is fair enough, but it does highlight how ridiculously close this all is.

This is going to be an interesting thread over the next few months/years for sure.

No. While Pakistan are as good a bet as any as no.1, I guarantee you if this thread was made a week and a bit ago 95% of the people saying Pakistan wouldn't have even thought of them

 

[Black_Warrior]

^ Correct.

 

[honestbharani]

No. While Pakistan are as good a bet as any as no.1, I guarantee you if this thread was made a week and a bit ago 95% of the people saying Pakistan wouldn't have even thought of them

Nah... it is wrong and over simplifying things to say it like that. I posted in a thread a week ago about how I expect Pak to be #1 at the end of this fatal 4 way going on at the moment for the #1 ranking. And most posters here always had Pak in the conversations reg. the best team in the world as everyone recognized them as a very solid team with fewer weaknesses. The only thing holding anyone back from rating them is the lack of their overseas cricket and now that they went to England and won, people are rightfully recognizing that they are the best out of a very closely matched group. And as Adders pointed out, it is because teams are this close to each other that a session or a test is influencing votes so much. IT is not like Pak is touted as #1 just because they beat England in England. They were always one of the top sides and this win just makes it easier for most people to place them above the rest.

 

[Black_Warrior]

I am not sure about that. People were not rating this team because of their lack of away cricket. That was always held against them. Not talking about you in particular but you can have a look at the posts in the England-Pakistan thread from the first few pages. People were expecting a 0-4 thrashing.

 

[hendrix]

Well yeah, but given this was a 4 test series - long enough to get a really good look - and all of the tests bar the second were highly competitive, I think it's fair to give it a serious weighting.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Well yeah, but given this was a 4 test series - long enough to get a really good look - and all of the tests bar the second were highly competitive, I think it's fair to give it a serious weighting.

I don't think anyone disagrees with that.

 

[wpdavid]

Absolutely, so really it's not even about coming down to one test match.........a single session can change our opinions on how we're ranking these teams.

Which really is remarkable when you think about it. Has test cricket ever been so competitive??

Probably not to this extent, and not involving quite so many teams.

But the other really competitive time that I remember was the mid-1990's when Aus were in the process of overtaking WI and SA and Pakistan were also terrific.

And what could have been an incredibly competitive era was around the time of WSC. Not only Aus and WI, but Pakistan had just drawn a series in Aus and come very close to drawing a series in WI.

Going back a while to the mid 1950s, England and Aus, weren't so very far ahead of SA and WI.

 

[Tec15]

England are being really overrated away from home now. Was well beaten 2-0 in the UAE but its' apparently considered a "competitive performance" so we start by already grading on a curve. Haven't beaten New Zealand, Sri Lanka or West Indies away (The last one was just last year). Was thrashed 5-0 in Australia the last time they played. Their win in India was some time ago and with a very different team and the three players most crucial in that victory aren't touring again. And that leaves just the win in South Africa earlier this year to do some really heavy lifting in making them look good away from home.

 

[Adders]

Well I think we can certainly remove Australia's name from the discussion.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Well I think we can certainly remove Australia's name from the discussion.

Nah maybe if Australia can't beat Pakistan at home this summer we can though. That would be very poor.