• 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.

*Official* England in Sri Lanka 2021

flibbertyjibber

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Given the ridiculous schedule this year they have to rotate and hopefully it will all look sensible come next winter when the better players aren't burnt out by playing too much.

I see we have added another 2 tests to the summer against NZ now. Mad amount of games to play given covid is going to be here a long time and all the bubbles etc...
 

_00_deathscar

First Class Debutant
I know we enjoyed the Aussies losing to India but they have two blokes averaging over 50 with the bat as well an off spinner and two fast bowlers better than anything we have ever produced.
For some reason I thought this was about India and was trying to rack my brain about who the other bloke averaging 50+ is, why you've missed Jadeja (or Ashwin if the other way), and who the second fast bowler is...
 

_00_deathscar

First Class Debutant
Unfortunately Anderson is not as good as Cummins, Lillee, McGrath and probably even Hazlewood and Ryan Harris if you were to compare us with the Aussies. Seriously when was the last time an English pacer averaged in the low 20’s even when we have better bowling conditions than Australia
Anderson isn't as good as Lillee and McGrath, and probably Cummins too if he continues this trajectory (or even right now). But he's better than Haze (or at least it's even) and Ryan ****ing Harris.

As much as I hate on Anderson, if I had to pick one or the other (Harris) I'd definitely go for the guy going at about ~25 in the last decade with 100+ tests or something mad. At least he'd be on the pitch.
 

Chewy

Cricket Spectator
Anderson isn't as good as Lillee and McGrath, and probably Cummins too if he continues this trajectory (or even right now). But he's better than Haze (or at least it's even) and Ryan ****ing Harris.

As much as I hate on Anderson, if I had to pick one or the other (Harris) I'd definitely go for the guy going at about ~25 in the last decade with 100+ tests or something mad. At least he'd be on the pitch.
Ryan Harris and Josh Hazlewood have a much better bowling average than James Anderson.

The second bloke I was thinking of Marnus Labuschange who is a perfect example of what I mean. Was like Crawley before he entered test cricket and now averages 60 plus. He’ll average over 50 whilst Zak Crawley will average 30
 

DriveClub

International Debutant
Ryan Harris and Josh Hazlewood have a much better bowling average than James Anderson.

The second bloke I was thinking of Marnus Labuschange who is a perfect example of what I mean. Was like Crawley before he entered test cricket and now averages 60 plus. He’ll average over 50 whilst Zak Crawley will average 30
Australian batsmen get at least 1 series per year to feast on poor bowlers on flat pitches to inflate their averages. Otherwise you wouldn't have useless bats like Burns, Head averaging 100 in the beginning of their careers.
 

Chewy

Cricket Spectator
Yeah, he has a very similar record to Bruce Reid and nobody jizzes over him like they do Harris.
There you go - there’s another one. I’m racking my brain to think of any of our test bowlers sans Fred Truman who have averaged in the low 20’s. To make matters worse we have the most bowler friendly wickets in the world
 

_00_deathscar

First Class Debutant
There you go - there’s another one. I’m racking my brain to think of any of our test bowlers sans Fred Truman who have averaged in the low 20’s. To make matters worse we have the most bowler friendly wickets in the world
Jimmy Anderson since like 2010 or 2014 or whatever has been seriously, seriously good (especially at home and even pretty decent away). There are very few bowlers in the last ~10 years I'd take over him - Cummins, Bumrah, Steyn...that level. Which is next level talent/ATG greatness (whether the first two get there is another question).
 

DriveClub

International Debutant
There you go - there’s another one. I’m racking my brain to think of any of our test bowlers sans Fred Truman who have averaged in the low 20’s. To make matters worse we have the most bowler friendly wickets in the world
English conditions being swing friendly and using the duke ball is one reason I would think English bowlers traditionally struggle to adapt when touring flattish conditions and bowling with the kookaburra. They don't develope enough skill sets playing in England that would equip them to be successful everywhere.
 

Chewy

Cricket Spectator
Australian batsmen get at least 1 series per year to feast on poor bowlers on flat pitches to inflate their averages. Otherwise you wouldn't have useless bats like Burns, Head averaging 100 in the beginning of their careers.
Fair enough. That does not explain Smith, Hayden, Steve Waugh, Labuschagne, Ponting etc having averages in excess of 50 whilst having bowlers averaging less than 25. Whilst I can understand that we should have less batsman averaging 50 than Australia due to our wickets it doesn’t explain why we have never had a fast bowler average less than 25 - McGrath averaged 20 ffs on supposed roads.
 

ImpatientLime

International Debutant
questioning why england have not produced a universally acknowledged atg since ian botham is a very valid discussion but some of your opinions re lyon, harris, hazlewood etc v english equivalents are just hyperbole.
 

DriveClub

International Debutant
Fair enough. That does not explain Smith, Hayden, Steve Waugh, Labuschagne, Ponting etc having averages in excess of 50 whilst having bowlers averaging less than 25. Whilst I can understand that we should have less batsman averaging 50 than Australia due to our wickets it doesn’t explain why we have never had a fast bowler average less than 25 - McGrath averaged 20 ffs on supposed roads.
Because English cricketers never have the drive to be the absolute best for whatever reason. They just lack that extra bit of competitive nous/individualistic drive to wanting to be the best, that's my flawed perception from the outside about the English cricketing culture I think.
 

Chewy

Cricket Spectator
questioning why england have not produced a universally acknowledged atg since ian botham is a very valid discussion but some of your opinions re lyon, harris, hazlewood etc v english equivalents are just hyperbole.
I think it is a very valid point - part of it I feel is that we don’t push our players to be better.

Jos Buttler is a good example - we way we talk about him you would think he is another AB De Villers yet he averages 35. Joe Burns and Travis Head average more than that. If he averaged that for India, Australia and even NZ, he wouldn’t be anywhere near the test side. Sam Curran is another one. His bating liked like it could explode but he has regressed as a player. He now looks like no more than an average bits and pieces cricketer - if he played for one of those sides he would have progressed significantly
 

ImpatientLime

International Debutant
buttler is a guy with a very limited fc record so i'm not sure his trials and tribulations in test match cricket should come as much shock. on the other hand he is a dead cert, atg in white ball cricket. acknowledged by everyone.

i mean curran is an ok player. i don't see people shouting to proclaim him the heir to ben stokes.
 

Top