To those doubting how good our Test Side is

[saneindian]

As good as England have been, the true test will lie in how they play in the sub continent. The world cup showed the limitations of this English team. Even with better preparation and adequate rest, it's not going to be easy. And now that you are no 1, you will be expected to roll over Lanka and Pakistan. Less than series whitewash will see you lose points. The poressure of saving your number 1 rank in the heat and in conditions were ball would not bounce much and will not swing or seam is going to test your attack.

[maniac]

When India was No1 evry Tom,Dick and Harry was doubting their credentials despite being world champions in ODI and 'technically' having the best T20 team in the form of CSK saying that we were nothing compared to the Aussies of the 90's and 2000's and WI of 70's and 80's. Seeing some of the English pundits question our status in the last 2 years As an Indian fan This gives me equal rights to question England's credentials as a true NO1 and dominant force till they 1)Be an amazing ODI team 2)Be an amazing T20 squad 3)Win on Subcontinental tracks be it Tests,ODI or T20 Have multi dimensional players who can perform in all conditions be it batsmen or bowlers eg;Despite the batting debacle it was a common consensus that we atleast had 3 players SRT,Dravid and Laxman who would do well in any condition,currently I don't see anyone of that nature in the english squad. I know that you spoke only about your test side and yes,they are good but still have a long way before they become the best ala Aussies and WI of the past.Welcome to the forums and congrats for your teams performance.As of now they are No1 but their status will be debatable just like India's in the last 2 years

[NareshK]

Seeing some of the English pundits question our status in the last 2 years As an Indian fan This gives me equal rights to question England's credentials as a true NO1 and dominant force till they 1)Be an amazing ODI team 2)Be an amazing T20 squad 3)Win on Subcontinental tracks be it Tests,ODI or T20

Forget amazing. They lost to Bangladesh and Ireland in the World Cup.:giggle:

[rajmarie]

Welcome to form.....hope u enjoy ur stay here....& also have a good time while ur team is playing such a wonderful cricket ATM. India have a lot of issues...which were in the making & need some serious & harsh decisions to get back in the game. Only time will tell if BCCI have any interest in actually seeing India do well...or only how they do financially

[amiret]

India drew 1-1 against the mighty Aussies under Steve Waugh in 2004 in Australia. They would have won the series if they had bowled out the tail in the final test. That was the biggest achievement by this test team and probably by any other team. That Aussie team was almost unbeatable. Try and top that' date= England.

Yes An aussie team without Warne , McGrath & Bret Lee missing in 2 matches was unbeatable. By the way, 12 months later in 2004-2005 when McGrath & Warne came back we lost the series at home 2-1.

[NareshK]

^^Its not India's fault that they were injured. Besides Indian batsmen always murdered Warne.

[kabira]

Samba, kab hai holi..holi kab hai... i.e when is next England v/s India Series in India. Time for revenge. If we prepare dustbowls, they have no chance.. I hope our team is hurting and thinking about payback. When Aussies lost Ashes in 2005, Ponting took it personally. They start to plan revenge and guess what English team was decimated 5-0, even worse English team did not go through that. Hope our team can do the same. England have good team no doubt, but I would want to see how they play in Lanka and UAE.

[akshayxyz]

People who are saying - had we dominated NZ, WI, or had we maximized our home advantage or this or that.... Well the fact is, we had our share of opportunities and we did not capitalize on them. That shows, we were barely clinging on the top - for whatever reasons - we did not have desire/ability to better ourselves. So, that can not be an excuse. A true champion has to sense that and go for the kill and keep widening the gap from #2. E.g. Aussies' past domination in ODIs has helped them stay at the top, even when others have got significantly better (we won WC!! and yet nowhere near them in terms of rating points). Even though one can say (even I did sometimes) England did not beat our full strength team and can be passed off as a legitimate 'reason'. But when you look at that objectively, even that is a lame excuse. Indian players, management did not know where their priorities lie ( or we took things for granted). Ask any team which scaled the #1 peak (and stayed there) - no one would disagree that it is not just those 5 days of cricket or 11 players in the field. It takes lot of preparation, planning & execution at all levels (and some luck - which gets nullified in longer run). Involves all aspects, talent hunt, coaching, rotation, injury management... So, the fact that we got thrashed from #1 to #3 within a month or so - shows the glaring gaps that need to be filled - in the whole system. Either we get serious about filling them at all levels, or keep waiting for Sehwag, ZK, Bhajji, Gambhir etc. to come back to their 100% for another momentary shot at glory. But, that definitely is not the long term solution.

[Vijay.Sharma]

People who are saying - had we dominated NZ, WI, or had we maximized our home advantage or this or that.... Well the fact is, we had our share of opportunities and we did not capitalize on them. That shows, we were barely clinging on the top - for whatever reasons - we did not have desire/ability to better ourselves. So, that can not be an excuse. A true champion has to sense that and go for the kill and keep widening the gap from #2. E.g. Aussies' past domination in ODIs has helped them stay at the top, even when others have got significantly better (we won WC!! and yet nowhere near them in terms of rating points).

Isn't that our whole point in the first place? We are using NZ 2009, WI 2011 and SA 2011 as examples to state the point.

Even though one can say (even I did sometimes) England did not beat our full strength team and can be passed off as a legitimate 'reason'. But when you look at that objectively' date=' even that is a lame excuse. Indian players, management did not know where their priorities lie ( or we took things for granted).[/quote']Even if you look at it subjectively that point is well made and it stays. No two ways about it.

[akshayxyz]

^ you missed my point by light years. I will leave the explanation for some other time.

[Vijay.Sharma]

^ you missed my point by light years. I will leave the explanation for some other time.

I thought I agreed with your point... :blink:

[akshayxyz]

See, if your agreement is so confusing, then imagine how hard it is to comprehend your arguments :winky: time for me to sleep I guess.

[Vijay.Sharma]

See, if your agreement is so confusing, then imagine how hard it is to comprehend your arguments :winky: time for me to sleep I guess.

Remember I am already sleeping while doing the physical posting? :winky:

[Kinwell Smart]

Nothing to take away from the sheer domination of England over India. England are deservedly number 1 today. But let's wait and see if they are a better number 1 team than India were. India held on to that spot for 21 months. Let's wait and see if England can. If they do, then no shame in saying "England were/are a better number 1 side than India was". I think India's fall was coming in many ways given the way they played defensively at times they need not have. for ex- NZ 2009 when they could have won the 3rd test, SA 2011 when they could've made an effort to win the third Test, WI 2011 when they could've given a go to win the Test. Their defensive attitude cost them their ranking. Had India won even 2 of those 3 games they would've had better points but more importantly would have been better for the experience. Now destiny calls upon England to show what it has to offer. I will not mask my dislike of England here but even given that I don't see England holding on to the number 1 spot by the end of the season. I expect the Saffers to be number 1 even as early as the turn of the year. Let's see how England perform against SL and India in Asia. You beat SL and India in Asia and you are truly a better number 1 team than India were. A team's number one-ism depends on how they play in alien conditions. Australia did well on that front. India and SA have done well on that front. Eng need to show us what they got. They've ticked off Aus and SA...they need to tick off SL, Ind.

Probably a few points need to be made. Firstly, the 'win abroad' scenario. England haven't won abroad as no.1 yet, but then again, they haven't played abroad since they became no.1. However, they did win there last outing abroad, in Australia, never an easy task and somewhere where India have never won (since they started playing Tests). India haven't really been that stellar abroad as no.1, managing to win in WI & BD, but only managing a draw in SA & SL. I'd say India have not performed that well in alien conditions, at least not compared to Aus. I'd also like to pay attention to a couple of your 'what ifs'. Versus NZ, you claim India could have won more handsomely, rather than 1-0. It needs to be pointed out that NZ could've won the 1st Test of that series. I'd have that 3rd Test in SA failry evenly poised, time simply ran out for both sides

[Kinwell Smart]

we did better than eng did on tour of sa and the side eng beat in aus we whitewashed them in india .

Whitewashed is rather gilding the lily there, it was a 2 match series and India won the 1st by 1 wicket. A win is a win, but it's hardly comparable to the loss Inida have just suffered in England, or even the loss Aus suffered in Aus to England. Why do you say India performed better in SA than England? Weren't both series 1-1?

[punjabi_khota]

Whitewashed is rather gilding the lily there' date=' it was a 2 match series and[b'] India won the 1st by 1 wicket. A win is a win, but it's hardly comparable to the loss Inida have just suffered in England, or even the loss Aus suffered in Aus to England. Why do you say India performed better in SA than England? Weren't both series 1-1?

A draw is a draw but IIRC, England drew two games hanging on by ONE WICKET in SA :giggle:

[Rahul Dravid]

i can't really doubt any of what you are saying... maybe strauss tho.. he hasn't really been in great form, but nonetheless he is another class act.

[Kinwell Smart]

A draw is a draw but IIRC' date=' England drew two games hanging on by ONE WICKET in SA :giggle:[/quote'] So either a win is a win (and a draw is a draw) or it isn't, just as 1 wicket is significant or it isn't. You can't discount the one wicket as irrelevent when India win by it, yet portray it as meaningful when England draw by it. As I said before, gilding the lily a bit

[punjabi_khota]

So either a win is a win (and a draw is a draw) or it isn't, just as 1 wicket is significant or it isn't. You can't discount the one wicket as irrelevent when India win by it, yet portray it as meaningful when England draw by it. As I said before, gilding the lily a bit

:haha: That was my whole point. England dominated OZ better than India did, while India was the better team than England in SA. You are gliding the lily if you say England played as well as INdia in SA>

[Kinwell Smart]

:haha: That was my whole point. England dominated OZ better than India did' date=' while India was the better team than England in SA. You are gliding the lily if you say England played as well as INdia in SA>[/quote'] I think you'll find that I said that India hadn't won in SA in response to the OP who claimed that India had performed as well in alien conditions as Oz and that England had yet to prove themselves in alien conditions.