Even, if we get thrashed, won't stop us being second in the world.Turbinator said:I don't know, I guess thats just my opinion. Anyways, if England give the Aussies a hard time this year, I'll be more than happy to admit it that England deserve to be number 2 in the world. However, I expect this year's ashes to be very one sided.
Welcome back Dean, yeah I'm not too fussed about the Ashes, but there's no doubting it produces some fantastic cricket..GeraintIsMyHero said:England-Australia is the oldest, of course it's the most traditional rivalry. If you're sick of it, don't watch.
Right now, they might be second-best in the world but that's mainly because the other contenders (India, South Africa and Pakistan) have all pulled off crap performances of late. Don't get me wrong, I definitely rate the English side highly and they may be #2 in the world, but they're not as good as some make it seem. The Ashes hype played it's part for sure. I wouldn't be surprised if they do very well in the Ashes, but I wouldn't be surprised if they fall flat on their faces either. In short, I'm just not sure about the English side yet.Mr Mxyzptlk said:They're still considered second-best in the world. Are you contesting that they're second-best in the world?
Remind us how many sides have won in SA, or gone to India with half a side and not lost the series?Turbinator said:No more like Australia vs "fill in any team".
England is not good and consistent enough to occupy the number 2 spot for long.
Remind us what the result was against Sri Lanka and against Pakistan in Pakistan?marc71178 said:Remind us how many sides have won in SA, or gone to India with half a side and not lost the series?
Also remind us how many games pre-Ashes England had without defeat, then tell us how that isn't consistent?