my 3rd test review
You know ha i always expected England to win this series - but the manner in which they have drubbed IND i didnt expect and i truly amazing everytime i look back the scores and highlights of the past three test - utter obliteration.
This England team certainly has all the ingredients to potentially become the best ENG team since the glorious 1951-1958 side, that dominated test cricket unequivocally. Great days most certainly lie ahead, im already chomping at the bit in anticipation of ENGs upcoming winter tests.
This win also pretty much proves as ive said for the last 4 years that Indian's 2007 win in England was a fluke due to the fact ENG have plethora of injuries to key players (Flintoff, Hoggard, Trescothick, Harmison, S Jones) and the then experienced Indian team had a ease ride against some then young English players. Now that Anderson/Tremlett have come of age as bowlers compared to their bowlers who were finding their feet in test cricket in 2007 - they have owned the legendary IND batting line-up.
Sehwag double duck although one can fairly claim he probably hasn't had the best preparation, still does highlight the man's inept technique when facing quality fast-bowlers in pacer friendly conditions. His legacy as a great opener is on the line for the remainder of 2011 for sure, further failures in the final test and when IND go to Australia this Christmas, will solidify once and for all that he is nothing more than a flat-track bully and cannot be mentioned amongts the hierarchy of great openers in test history.
However though i go back on my old pet peeve and i continue to maintain its still too soon to rank ENG as number #1, just 8 months into their potentially dynasty which begun with the 2010/11 Ashes win. Its extremely knee-jerk to do judge ENG based on that fact that they won 19 out their last 30 tests since May 2009 as this BBC article shows:
BBC Sport - Reaction as England beat India to move top of the cricket rankings
ENGLAND SINCE MAY 2009
Beat West Indies 2-0 (home)
Beat Australia 2-1 (home)
Drew 1-1 with S Africa (away)
Beat Bangladesh 2-0 (away)
Beat Bangladesh 2-0 (home)
Beat Pakistan 3-1 (home)
Beat Australia 3-1 (away)
Beat Sri Lanka 1-0 (home)
Lead India 3-0 (home)
English cricket after the Moores/Pietersen saga between West Indies 2009 - Pakistan 2010 where the embryonic stages of the Strauss/Flower partnership and development. No one in their right mind was ranking of speaking of England as anything close to best team in the world then and rightly so because they had alot players who did not convince the world they good all-round players.
The 2010/11 Ashes win regardless of how far this team goes in the future, will be regarded by historians im sure as the starting point of this teams greatness. Thats why the West Indies 76-91 dynasty is always started in 1976 in England and AUS 95-2007 dynasty also begins from the 95 win in the Caribbean.
Players for ENG like Anderson, Tremlett, Cook, Bell, Bresnan came of age in Ashes 2010/11. The faulty ICC ranking system which judges form of the a short two year period, does not recongize this and its has incorrectly made a correlation with ENG of between of WI 09 - PAK 2010 to ENG between AUS 2010/11 - IND 2011. Those are two completely different ENG teams that one cannot compare.
Another dumb thing i saw was this cricinfo statement at the end of the match:
cricinfo said:
55.3Bresnan to Sreesanth, OUT, 86.5 mph, that's it! Bresnan finishes it. 3-0 England, and for the first time since 1980 England are the world's No. 1 team! Length ball kicked up onto the shoulder of the bat, it flew to Pietersen at gully to spark wild celebrations. England get into that huddle we've seen at the end of their last three brilliant wins and they have absolutely nailed India here
WHATTT???. Reallly what kind of crazy revisionism of test history is that. No way was any English team # 1 in 1980, its is pretty damn well known common knowledge that the West Indies era of dominance which stretched from 1976-1991, covers 1980.
If their was unofficial ranking system back them which presumably made that fraudulent assessment of the ENG side of 1980 doesn't know cricket and is just another example of why ranking system of any form are a joke.
Only the 1951-1958 ENG side was ever a #1 of any shape, form or size in test history.
All this win proves that ENG have now moved ahead of IND, but they aren't better than S Africa. If the Saffies en route to what will be a big series here next summer crush opponent in their path, no way can people say ENG are #1 unless England beat S Africa next summer.
But if S Africa were to slip up this year i.e losing or failing to defeat Australia (a potentially rejuvenated Aussies mind you) in their upcoming two test series by the end of 2011, that would be better time to call ENG # 1 since that will be a clear sign that the Saffies are slipping just like IND as the two premier test teams since the dominant Australia era ended in February 2007.