So, is anyone following the cricket?

deptfordmarmoset

I think cricket watchers will just have seen the best-in-living-memory England team in action these last 2 tests. You can get these guys on the ropes but they fight back with immense style and force.

Sure, India are missing 3 of their best players but they've been outplayed with bat, ball and in the field. India, currently rated the number one team in the world, are being made to look almost mediocre.

I say ''best in living memory'' but can anyone remember a better team?

Big Hairy Wallapers

No

CiB

Yup. God's own game, cricket. If you want to hear a guttural roar dig out the TMS commentary of Broad's hat-trick on Saturday. Superb.

verylonglegs

I'm 35 so it's definitely the best test team I've seen, we've certainly had some shockers in the past, mid to late nineties was horrible to watch. Just need to impose ourselves on the oppostion and dominate in a tour of the sub-continent now to prove they really are the best test side in the world now although South Africans would dispute this no doubt.

inkyfingers

Watching the tail end of the game yesterday I was thinking that the reason this team is so good is because there is quality throughout, there's no superstar like a Lara or Tendulkar, just 11 excellent cricketers with no dead wood (+ another half a dozen who you could easily interchange without diluting it much).

Great to see, long may it continue.

SmellTheGlove

Watching when possible or listening - great from this England fan's pov but slightly disappointing that Sehwag's not around to stiffen up the Indian top order. I hope I'm wrong but I reckon he'll catch a diplomatic cold now that India have gone 2-0 down - won't want to be associated with the rest of the series.
England has its share of flair players but the whole side recognise the need to compete in every skill; anyone taking them on will be forced to beat them, rather than England being the team that crumbles and loses. Second innings batting scorecard was a dream to read.

squired

I think one of the most important elements of the current team/squad is their fighting spirit. England sides from previous years who were 120-odd for 8 in the first innings would have been all out a few balls later. Instead we scored a load more runs, which was pivotal. None of the players stand out as being particularly amazing, but if you look at the current batting and bowling world rankings I can't rememer the last time we came even close to the rankings we have right now across the team.

Pross

The current team have got that thing that previously made the Aussies great - they just won't admit they're beaten. I was listening to the first day as I drove home on Friday with wickets tumbling. In the back of my mind I was thinking how it was just like the old days but then realised that they had Bresnan, Broad and Swann to come and that 200 was still a possibility. Also, there was that feeling that if the Indian bowlers could tear the English batting apart then the English bowlers should do even better. We now have a number 10 batsman who would have played at 8 or even 7 in years gone by but the bowlers are still there on bowling ability rather than because they offer a compromise in the batting department. I feel that both Broad and Bresnan are better test batsmen than Flintoff was. With Trott's fitness in doubt England can go to a 5 man bowling attack if necessary and still have a very strong batting line up. Even when one (or even 3 or 4) players don't score runs you know that there will be a big partnership somewhere down the line.

squired

The one issue I have at the moment is with Strauss. He is extremely conservative and lacks the cut throat attitude of the Aussies. His habit of trying to make the game 100% safe before putting the opposition in to bat for the second time can be frustrating, as can his pandering to personal milestones before declaring.

If Trott isn't fit I'd expect England to bring in another batsman based on the way Strauss likes things. In his mind we are two up. Bowlers win you games, but more batsmen can save a game. Thus I think he will want a batting heavy team to try to guarantee a draw at the very least. Could be wrong though...

verylonglegs

I thought Sehwag is already only playing in the ODI's now, pretty sure I heard that in TMS yesterday afternoon as the Indians were collapsing.
The depth in batting we now have is very important, a massive difference from previous years. I read someone else making this very point and quoted a tail line-up from the past that consisted of Caddick, Mulally, Tufnell and Malcolm :shock: Effectively four number 11's!

Pross

squired wrote:

The one issue I have at the moment is with Strauss. He is extremely conservative and lacks the cut throat attitude of the Aussies. His habit of trying to make the game 100% safe before putting the opposition in to bat for the second time can be frustrating, as can his pandering to personal milestones before declaring.

If Trott isn't fit I'd expect England to bring in another batsman based on the way Strauss likes things. In his mind we are two up. Bowlers win you games, but more batsmen can save a game. Thus I think he will want a batting heavy team to try to guarantee a draw at the very least. Could be wrong though...

Not sure about that top bit, I think his declaration at Lords was just about perfect (possibly held on slightly longer than necessary to give Prior a place on the honours board). Again, at Trent Bridge there was plenty of time in the game to bowl them out so why not make sure you can't lose before going out to win? I suspect they will stick with 4 bowlers in the 3rd test as it is what England do and the one thing they are guilty of IMHO is lack of flexibility. I always think having only 4 bowlers is a risk (look at India in the 1st test) especially when you have effectively 2 all rounders in the team.

deptfordmarmoset

I think I would probably have agreed with that criticism of Strauss ''pandering to personal milestones'' until very recently. Now I'm not so sure. When the team have needed a hero - someone to take back control of the game - it must help to know that Strauss will indulge their desire to shine and to add to their reputation, together with their places in the record book.

It seems to place more value on individual performances than the team's needs. But if these individuals find it motivating and actually play better then the team itself actually becomes stronger.

By coincidence, I just saw a link to a clip of Cavendish talking about the tension between the individual and the team perspectives for sprinters.

EDIT: this is the link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14370974

mark63

at the ripe old age of 48 i've had to sit through some pretty dire England games,
at last it looks as though we've found our teeth, long may it last,
i think strauss is one of the better captains we've had for a long time. cant wait for the next test to start

Stewie Griffin

Best English team of my life. My MCC Member mate is worth his weight in gold now 8)

Seen fire in Babylon? Now that was a team.

pauldavid

I recorded it and am keeping it handy for one night when I can't get off to sleep.

Couple of minutes of that should do the trick