Pakistan in England/Scotland 2006

[s2sschan]

That rankings system is stupid; it just isn't right when you almost completley outplay a team, win 1-0 and drop down.

But I agree that the 2nd best side in the world is the winner of this series.

Well, India won only One Test. In the end, Winning matters the most. Outplaying someone is Subjective.
I would put South Africa at No.2, England and Pakistan at Nos. 3 and 4, India and West Indies at 5 and 6.
Then again, only a full strength England would get the No.2 spot. With injuries, its just hard to rank sides.

Bell and Colly are decent bowlers.

I really don't believe in taking Part-Timers into consideration, especially in Tests.

England need an experienced Strike Bowler besides Hoggard.
I am sorry, Harmison doesn't fit the bill as a Strike bowler.

India was expected to win the series 4-0.

Which "Idiot" expected India to win 4-0?

 

[m_vaughan]

Which "Idiot" expected India to win 4-0?

Quite a few actually, including myself. And looking at the Windies record prior to this series, I dont really blame myself.

The rankings are fair in this case. You have got to beat lower ranked teams comprehensively to gain points.

 

[s2sschan]

Quite a few actually, including myself. And looking at the Windies record prior to this series, I dont really blame myself.

Despite the convincing series win, India is very fragile abroad.

All it takes is two fast bowlers and two blades of grass to send India reeling. Also applies to the other Sub-Continent teams.

Lara knew this, and asked repeatedly for fast bowlers and fast wickets. Unfortunately for him, the Windies board did not see anything beyond their egos.

Fact remains that India won only when the track suited our spinners.

 

[Manohar]

Look at how low the West Indies are in the rankings and how high India is. India was expected to win the series 4-0 but barely won it 1-0. I think the system is fair enough.

If this is the case why the ranking for England did not go down as they barely managed to draw with Sri Lanka which is also not a highly rated test team. England went down only one point for a draw with Sri Lanka but India lost 2 points for winning against West Indies. Does not seem to make sense. Have seen Sri Lanka play tests in India and West Indies play against India in West Indies. West Indies at present is a much better team than what their rating suggests.

 

[nightprowler10]

England's rating is 112, a mere 15 points higher than Sri Lanka's ATM. I'm not sure what it was before the series started but lets assume the difference was 17 points. Now IIRC, India's rating was 111 against West Indies' 72...(pause for effect)....that's a difference of 39 points. Do you see where I'm going with this?

 

[Sureshot]

England need an experienced Strike Bowler besides Hoggard.
I am sorry, Harmison doesn't fit the bill as a Strike bowler.

Harmison isn't a strike bowler?


That's funny because it's ridiculous.

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/england/content/player/14054.html

Strike rates of 56 and 37 in Tests and ODIs respectively isn't a strike bowler?

He may be out of form, but to say he isn't a strike bowler defies any logical thinking.

 

[evertonfan]

It is just stupid to dismiss Harmison as a strike bowler when he just out of form. He's always a threat in Tests, and you only need to look back at his astonishing 2004 season to see that he is a strike bowler. If and when he discovers that form again, his critics will be eating their words.

 

[s2sschan]

Harmison isn't a strike bowler?


That's funny because it's ridiculous.

http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/england/content/player/14054.html

Strike rates of 56 and 37 in Tests and ODIs respectively isn't a strike bowler?

He may be out of form, but to say he isn't a strike bowler defies any logical thinking.

Well I am wrong. My opinion was based on the opinions of some English fans and critics.

It is just stupid to dismiss Harmison as a strike bowler when he just out of form. He's always a threat in Tests, and you only need to look back at his astonishing 2004 season to see that he is a strike bowler. If and when he discovers that form again, his critics will be eating their words.

Even if he is a Strike bowler, can you count on Harmy, Hoggard, Plunkett, and Panesar to take 20 Pakistan wickets in every Test?

 

[Sureshot]

I think those 4 could tbh.

Monty is very underrated.

 

[evertonfan]

I think those 4 could tbh.

Monty is very underrated.

Indeed. Every one is all to quick to criticise his fielding and batting, but not a lot of people will say that he has the potential to one of England's greatest spinners since Laker. Or am I going over the top here?

 

[Sureshot]

I'd agree with it tbh. He genuinely spins it, and can rip it as much as I've seen any SLA. His fielding is improving, he did well on the Northants game on Sky the othe day, and his batting, well he did alright vs Murali.

But the fact is his batting shouldn't matter, he's a bowler he doesn't need to bat. He needs to be able to field to an extent.

But Monty's abilities with the ball alone surpass Giles all 3 aspects together.

Edit: Akmal isn't playing atm as he has come off because he bruised his finger earlier in the innings. Faisal Iqbal is keeping atm.

 

[Skater]

To all Pakistan fans: If you're coming to one of the matches this summer, brilliant, enjoy it. But please leave those annoying horns at home. Just clap for your team. Please.

 

[Pak_cricketer]

we dont use those as much as the Sri lankans do.

 

[Skater]

we dont use those as much as the Sri lankans do.

It's OK, it's just that I was watching a replay of the semi-final between the West Indies and Pakistan in the 2004 Champions Trophy and they drove me mad.

 

[nightprowler10]

It's OK, it's just that I was watching a replay of the semi-final between the West Indies and Pakistan in the 2004 Champions Trophy and they drove me mad.

Horns are much more common in West Indies fans than they are in Pakistani fans.