India in England 2011 August 24, 2011

High scores for England's complete side

England's 4-0 whitewash was arguably the most complete series victory in England's Test history. Every player from 1 to 11 made a contribution to the cause, as did the two who did not last the course, as India were outbatted, outbowled and outfielded in a
67

Andrew Strauss - 6
As one of the two key men behind the machine, Andrew Strauss is exempt from overt criticism at present. He and Andy Flower have just overseen their 20th Test victory since May 2009, and of those, 12 have been won by an innings. A leadership style devoid of ego has been instrumental in creating a team that more or less runs itself, although as the only member of the regular top seven who failed to score a hundred, he's bound to wish he'd made a greater personal contribution. At the age of 34, it's an awkward time for a loss of form, but with five months between Tests, he has plenty time to reassess his game.

Alastair Cook - 7
What an extraordinary series. A total of 20 runs in his first four innings, 34 in his sixth and last. And the small matter of 294 to complete the set at Edgbaston. No single player better epitomises the current mindset of this England team. Cook possesses the confidence to shrug off that early run of low scores, the discipline to make his starts count, the fitness - mental and physical - to bat without blinking for sessions and days on end, and a trusty, if unconventional, technique that fits him like an old pair of slippers. His shining example, instilled in him by his Essex mentor, Graham Gooch, has driven England's batting line-up to new heights.

Jonathan Trott - 6
His series was truncated by a shoulder injury sustained at Nottingham, but Trott did not leave without making his mark. On the first day at Lord's, under grim skies and in helpful swinging conditions, his determined resistance guarded England against collapse, and set the stage for Kevin Pietersen to flog England into the driving seat with his second-day 202 not out. Of the 13.3 overs that Zaheer Khan delivered in the series, Trott faced 25 deliveries in a useful 70 - not without alarm, but with enough assurance to carry the day for his team.

Ian Bell- 9
An exquisite coming of age from a batsman whose ever-classical strokeplay has now, after a lengthy engagement, been officially wedded to a steely, run-hungry temperament. He'd been threatening a performance of this magnitude for some time, not least during in the Ashes where he was too low down the order to get a proper say at No. 6, but Trott's misfortune gave him a chance at No. 3 that he was too well focussed to squander. His 159 at Trent Bridge was exceptional, if a touch overshadowed by his dozy tea-time antics, but his career-best 235 at The Oval was truly graceful, timely and chanceless. His time is now.

Kevin Pietersen - 9
Never has KP scored as many as 533 runs in a single series, and rarely has he looked quite so embedded in a team performance. After all the fretting about his wayward form, which included a run of two complete home seasons without a century, he's now racked up three of his top four Test scores in the space of eight months. Another man who has taken Gooch's "daddy hundreds" ethos to heart, he's cut out his tendency to squander a start with a rash piece of improvisation, and has saved his most damning stamps of class, such as his switch hit off Amit Mishra at The Oval, for moments when such strokes are truly justified. He's been seeking acceptance all throughout his career, but he's never looked quite this at home in any England team.

Eoin Morgan - 7
Morgan isn't used to being considered the dull one in England's middle order, but with Trott mostly absent and Bell and Pietersen reigning supreme, the heartbeat of England's one-day team took a peculiarly peripheral role in the five-day line-up. Much like Allan Lamb at Lord's in 1990, his century at Edgbaston was entirely overshadowed by the Essex-based feat of endurance going on at the other end, while at The Oval he missed out, Bopara-style, when he nicked off for 1 after suffering from pad-rash during a massive 350-run stand for the third wicket.

Ravi Bopara - 5
On a hiding to nothing at Edgbaston, when he came to the crease at a staggering 596 for 4, Bopara promptly missed a straight one to be adjudged lbw for 7. In a similar scenario at The Oval, he at least resolved to stick some runs on the board, and was looking pretty solid on 44 not out when the rain closed in to hasten England's declaration. The jury's still out, not least because he simply doesn't look as comfortable as any of his colleagues. But with Trott sure to return in the winter, he has no option but to bide his time.

Matt Prior - 9
Now one of England's most pivotal big-game players, Prior produced his most crucial moments at the sharp end of the series. At Lord's he turned a good start into an excellent one with a first-inning 71, then hauled England out of an Ishant Sharma-induced nose-dive with an outstanding 103 not out. At Nottingham he was powerless as England collapsed to 88 for 6 on the first morning, but swiftly atoned for that rare failure with a bruising 73 from 60 balls after tea on the decisive third day. In between whiles, he pocketed 16 catches and a stumping with scarcely a blemish of note. Comparisons with Adam Gilchrist are becoming less sacrilegious by the day.

Stuart Broad - 9
To think most pundits had been calling for his head before the series. In fairness, those pundits were right. The Broad who topped the averages with 25 wickets at 13.84, and stroked 182 runs at 60.66, was not the same purveyor of long-hops and faux-aggression who had struggled to buy a wicket against Sri Lanka in the first half of the summer. After being reminded of his priorities, he at last returned to the threatening full length that had proven so decisive against Australia in 2009, and reserved his ugly bouncer for moments when it was a true surprise. The manner in which he seized the day at Trent Bridge was incredible, first with a fantastic counter-attacking 64, and then with the English highlight of the summer, a series-turning hat-trick that shattered India's hopes of drawing level at 1-1.

Tim Bresnan - 9
Not since Ole Gunnar Solskjaer has there been a super-sub quite this invaluable. Bresnan would not have made the team but for Chris Tremlett's back spasm, but instead produced critical intercessions in each of the three Tests he played. He's not a lot to look at, big and burly with no apparent subtlety, but he is genuinely brisk, unyieldingly accurate, brimful of stamina, and can swing the ball later than anyone bar James Anderson. What is more, he's closer even than Broad to being a genuine allrounder, as his critical 90 at Nottingham attests. If England play five bowlers in their winter tour of the subcontinent, he might suddenly leap from last name on the team-sheet to first.

James Anderson - 9
He's the leader of the attack, the role to which he's always aspired, and just as in the Ashes, Anderson provided guaranteed menace, come rain or shine. In particular, he exerted a hold over Sachin Tendulkar that extended way beyond his tally of two dismissals in the opening two Tests. His unwavering length, movement both ways and rampant hostility ensured India's vaunted batting line-up was never allowed to settle, as demonstrated by the fact that he struck in his first over of an innings on three out of eight occasions. Provided the example that India's own seamers lacked once Zaheer had limped out of contention.

Graeme Swann - 7
Lesser spinners would have been feeling pretty paranoid by the time the final Test came around. On a trio of seamer's decks at Lord's, Trent Bridge and Edgbaston, he was limited to four wickets at 80.25 and was at times played with contemptuous ease by Rahul Dravid. But then, when the moment came and a surface that suited him was presented, Swann revelled in regaining the centre stage, scalping three early wickets in the first innings and six decisive ones in the second, for an excellent match haul of 9 for 208. His frustration was evident at times but his patience never snapped.

Chris Tremlett - 7
If you're a seamer, it's not wise to blink in this England team, let alone get injured. Tremlett started the series as the flavour of the month after dissecting Sri Lanka on a spicy deck at the Rose Bowl. In his only outing of the series he bagged four key wickets in two innings, including MS Dhoni with the second new ball on both occasions. All of a sudden, he's back on the bench, and he might yet stay there given the subcontinent is unlikely to play to his towering strengths. But what a presence to have waiting in the wings.

Andrew Miller is UK editor of ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • crikkfan on August 25, 2011, 17:59 GMT

    I would give 10 to Broad ! What more could he have done? His performance was Bothamesque

  • Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas on August 25, 2011, 14:18 GMT

    Andrew, you are being too harsh on Bell and KP. They should get a perfect 10 and may be Broad as well. Bell and KP set the stage and Broad finished it off. Isn't it? Don't you think you have to go back and change the marks for those three awesome players? I would have been glad if you ranked the Indian Team. I would have seen many zeros (well deserved zeros) and may be a 10 for Dravid (two small centuries - not his fault, team folded tamely; and one big century; all coming against a top notch bowling attack).

  • on August 25, 2011, 8:57 GMT

    England's team should be: 1)Andrew Strauss 2)Alistair Cook 3)Jonathan Trott 4)Kevin Pietersen 5)Ian Bell 6)Matt Prior 7)Tim Bresnan 8)Stuart Broad 9)Greame Swann 10)James Anderson 11)Chris Tremlett This is for the series against Pakistan in Dubai where England will not need 2 spinners because it doesn't favour spinners greatly but KP can bowl if required (he started his career at Natal as an off spinner, batting at 8). Morgan is not needed because England doesn't have a 'tail' because Bresnan, Broad, Swann and Anderson are capable batsmen (not too sure about Tremlett though). England's batting line up is so good that the only need 5 batsman, as they have a keeper who could bat anywhere that he was asked, they have 3 all rounders (Bresnan, Broad and Swann). England's numbers 7-10 could bat 1-4 and would do well, and 5 bowlers give England the chance to rotate the bowlers if 1 struggles, or they can bowl short sharp spells which would trouble batsman more than they already do.

  • on August 25, 2011, 8:48 GMT

    @Rick James and other Eng Fans.. Eng is No:1 Test team and they played outstanding cricket; the sort of cricket, We hoped Our team will present us with, sadly they did not, congrats to your team and all of you. Four years is two years too many to see India in England.. I hope ICC will allow the top six teams in tests to play each other more frequently than it is now.

  • Rajul_Tandon on August 25, 2011, 7:01 GMT

    Kudos to team England...a perfect 10 to the team...In crude terms they have chewed Team India and seems that they are going to munch till the completion of this tour...being an Indian fan feel disgusting and can compare this feeling to the 1st round exit from 2007 world cup....Well full credit goes to the English Team and trust that they will be able to keep this good form in the sub continent as well... none the less Cricket needs atleast 1 good team which can perforn in every condition so that others can keep improving and this english team have everything....whatever others say but hope to see a contest during there tour to the sub continent...........

  • 5wombats on August 25, 2011, 3:54 GMT

    There is some truly Gold Standard Trolling on this conversation! ;@NKTanwar; lovely to see that you have managed to find a way to prove to yourself that india are still "number 1", trouble is you forgot two crucial numbers from your calculations; 4 & 0. @Sat Matharu; yeah - you are right, "what goes around comes round" - and as far as india are concerned; it just did. I repeat something that I put somewhere else; How are india going to beat England in india my friend? What have they got that we haven't aready seen and thrashed here in England? Englands batsmen will clean up in india - a team who currently have no spinner and an injury/paunch prone seamer. To use my preferred expression; "It'll be fun to watch".

  • on August 25, 2011, 0:41 GMT

    If england needs to prove themselves in subcontinent to be the no. 1, why not India prove them selves in seaming wickets to claim no 1.....or rather to claim no 3 atleast....???? Did India prove themselves overseas when they were no 1...I doubt....I think this ranking system is flawed and need bit of tinkering.....

  • kesasam on August 25, 2011, 0:16 GMT

    @@@@Sehwagologist@@@@ he is gone crazy...he is repating the same paragraph on and on. Hope he hasnt sallow anything that couldnt digest....Hope u enjoying the indian summer....Good luck and all the best team England...Sri Lankan fan

  • hhillbumper on August 24, 2011, 18:31 GMT

    I feel the class shown by some indian fans on this website is intriguing.England were lucky to win and if India had tried,or played at home then England would have been hammered.India won two years ago and so on.With that slightly jaundiced attitude we can see why India will continue to slip down the world rankings.I hope Tendulkar does not retire as it has been funny watching how incompetent he is when the team needs him.As opposed to Dravid who would be welcomed in the England team.Kumar was a worthwhile adversary but the rest were laughable and amazed how they scored any runs as seemingly they whimper when it does not go their way.Good thing Swann was not on top form or it could have been carnage.Oh wait it was

  • itsfredtitmus on August 24, 2011, 18:24 GMT

    The Rose Bowl pitch was very flat, not spicy. Do not underrate that spell by Tremlett. Otherwise a good sum up. Although I would like to know what more Broad could have done for a 10!

  • crikkfan on August 25, 2011, 17:59 GMT

    I would give 10 to Broad ! What more could he have done? His performance was Bothamesque

  • Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas on August 25, 2011, 14:18 GMT

    Andrew, you are being too harsh on Bell and KP. They should get a perfect 10 and may be Broad as well. Bell and KP set the stage and Broad finished it off. Isn't it? Don't you think you have to go back and change the marks for those three awesome players? I would have been glad if you ranked the Indian Team. I would have seen many zeros (well deserved zeros) and may be a 10 for Dravid (two small centuries - not his fault, team folded tamely; and one big century; all coming against a top notch bowling attack).

  • on August 25, 2011, 8:57 GMT

    England's team should be: 1)Andrew Strauss 2)Alistair Cook 3)Jonathan Trott 4)Kevin Pietersen 5)Ian Bell 6)Matt Prior 7)Tim Bresnan 8)Stuart Broad 9)Greame Swann 10)James Anderson 11)Chris Tremlett This is for the series against Pakistan in Dubai where England will not need 2 spinners because it doesn't favour spinners greatly but KP can bowl if required (he started his career at Natal as an off spinner, batting at 8). Morgan is not needed because England doesn't have a 'tail' because Bresnan, Broad, Swann and Anderson are capable batsmen (not too sure about Tremlett though). England's batting line up is so good that the only need 5 batsman, as they have a keeper who could bat anywhere that he was asked, they have 3 all rounders (Bresnan, Broad and Swann). England's numbers 7-10 could bat 1-4 and would do well, and 5 bowlers give England the chance to rotate the bowlers if 1 struggles, or they can bowl short sharp spells which would trouble batsman more than they already do.

  • on August 25, 2011, 8:48 GMT

    @Rick James and other Eng Fans.. Eng is No:1 Test team and they played outstanding cricket; the sort of cricket, We hoped Our team will present us with, sadly they did not, congrats to your team and all of you. Four years is two years too many to see India in England.. I hope ICC will allow the top six teams in tests to play each other more frequently than it is now.

  • Rajul_Tandon on August 25, 2011, 7:01 GMT

    Kudos to team England...a perfect 10 to the team...In crude terms they have chewed Team India and seems that they are going to munch till the completion of this tour...being an Indian fan feel disgusting and can compare this feeling to the 1st round exit from 2007 world cup....Well full credit goes to the English Team and trust that they will be able to keep this good form in the sub continent as well... none the less Cricket needs atleast 1 good team which can perforn in every condition so that others can keep improving and this english team have everything....whatever others say but hope to see a contest during there tour to the sub continent...........

  • 5wombats on August 25, 2011, 3:54 GMT

    There is some truly Gold Standard Trolling on this conversation! ;@NKTanwar; lovely to see that you have managed to find a way to prove to yourself that india are still "number 1", trouble is you forgot two crucial numbers from your calculations; 4 & 0. @Sat Matharu; yeah - you are right, "what goes around comes round" - and as far as india are concerned; it just did. I repeat something that I put somewhere else; How are india going to beat England in india my friend? What have they got that we haven't aready seen and thrashed here in England? Englands batsmen will clean up in india - a team who currently have no spinner and an injury/paunch prone seamer. To use my preferred expression; "It'll be fun to watch".

  • on August 25, 2011, 0:41 GMT

    If england needs to prove themselves in subcontinent to be the no. 1, why not India prove them selves in seaming wickets to claim no 1.....or rather to claim no 3 atleast....???? Did India prove themselves overseas when they were no 1...I doubt....I think this ranking system is flawed and need bit of tinkering.....

  • kesasam on August 25, 2011, 0:16 GMT

    @@@@Sehwagologist@@@@ he is gone crazy...he is repating the same paragraph on and on. Hope he hasnt sallow anything that couldnt digest....Hope u enjoying the indian summer....Good luck and all the best team England...Sri Lankan fan

  • hhillbumper on August 24, 2011, 18:31 GMT

    I feel the class shown by some indian fans on this website is intriguing.England were lucky to win and if India had tried,or played at home then England would have been hammered.India won two years ago and so on.With that slightly jaundiced attitude we can see why India will continue to slip down the world rankings.I hope Tendulkar does not retire as it has been funny watching how incompetent he is when the team needs him.As opposed to Dravid who would be welcomed in the England team.Kumar was a worthwhile adversary but the rest were laughable and amazed how they scored any runs as seemingly they whimper when it does not go their way.Good thing Swann was not on top form or it could have been carnage.Oh wait it was

  • itsfredtitmus on August 24, 2011, 18:24 GMT

    The Rose Bowl pitch was very flat, not spicy. Do not underrate that spell by Tremlett. Otherwise a good sum up. Although I would like to know what more Broad could have done for a 10!

  • Hugo65 on August 24, 2011, 16:41 GMT

    Surely it is absurd to rate Eoin Morgan's (7) above Strauss (6)? Morgan's only meaningful contributions were at Edgbaston when he made 104 (with 3 lives and scored slowly considering the game situation) and 70 at Trent Bridge. Importantly, Morgan is in the middle order in a team making tons of runs - he didn't even start his Edgbaston innings until England were already 150 ahead with only 3 wickets down - not exactly 'tough runs'. Morgan averaged 32 for the series. Conversely, Strauss captained the team exceptionally well, caught well and as an opener gave England a start in every innings, with scores of 22, 32, 32, 16, 40, 87, for an average of 38. OK, he didn't 'go on' except for his last innings but at least he gave England a solid start every time. In my opinion we are no nearer to knowing whether Morgan can make it at Test level - it is very disappointing that he is clearly still fallible outside the off stump, even against this very weak Indian attack.

  • professor_zero on August 24, 2011, 15:14 GMT

    @Sat Matharu: Who is there to replace Swann? Just Monty Panesar, with 126 Test wickets, the second leading wicket-taker in the County Championship this year and a better spinner than anyone the Indians can currently muster.

  • Sigma-Eleven on August 24, 2011, 15:09 GMT

    See the Combined Ranking below: INDIA is Still #1.

    Test Rankings: Team Ranking Rating ENG 1 125 SA 2 118 IND 3 117 SL 4 108 AUS 5 100 PAK 6 93 WI 7 89 NZ 8 78 ZIM 9 63 BAN 10 8

    ODI Rankings: Team Ranking Rating AUS 1 130 SL 2 119 IND 3 117 SA 4 116 ENG 5 106 PAK 6 100 NZ 7 90 WI 8 78 BAN 9 63 ZIM 10 46

    Overall Rankings (Combination of Test and ODI):

    Team Overall Ranking Combined Rating (Avg of Test and ODI) IND 1 117 SA 1 117 ENG 3 115.5 AUS 4 115 SL 5 113.5 PAK 6 96.5 NZ 7 84 WI 8 83.5 ZIM 9 54.5 BAN 10 35.5

  • Rorzz on August 24, 2011, 15:04 GMT

    I can't believe some still refuse to accept England are the best team in the world at the moment. ICC player rankings are based on a full years performance, home and away. As it stands, we have 4 batsmen in the top 8, 2 top order, 2 middle order. No other team has more than one. We have 3 bowlers in the top 5, with Tremlett and Bresnan at 10 and 11. Whichever one gets to bowl a full series goes up. So Tremlett, who can't get into the England team, would be first change for SA and would take the new ball for Ind and Aus. And 3 of our bowlers are in the top 8 all-rounders. Again, Bresnan's going up all the time. So our team is a top 6 including 4 of the top 8 batsmen, Matt Prior, an all-rounder with a batting av.of 46 and a bowling av. of 24, followed by 3 of the top five bowlers, including the 2nd best all-rounder at No.9 and the 6th best all-rounder at No.10. We've the best top order, middle-order, keeper, all-rounders, pace attack and spinner. Yet we're not a true No.1?

  • vsssarma on August 24, 2011, 14:58 GMT

    Mine is a computer-generated rating system. It is the performance of each player on a 'per match' basis.

    Matches played - Runs - Innings - Balls Bowled - Runs Conceded - Wkts taken - Cts

    Broad, S C J - 4 - 182 - 3 - 908 - 346 - 25 - 2 - 10.00

    Bresnan, T T - 3 - 154 - 2 - 549 - 261 - 16 - 0 - 9.65

    Pietersen, K P - 4 - 533 - 5 - 120 - 91 - 0 - 3 - 8.84

    Bell, I R - 4 - 504 - 6 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 3 - 8.15

    Cook, A N - 4 - 348 - 6 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 5 - 5.76

    Anderson, J M - 4 - 20 - 1 - 1003 - 540 - 21 - 4 - 5.40

    Prior, M J - 4 - 271 - 4 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 17 - 5.25

    Swann, G P - 4 - 55 - 3 - 852 - 529 - 13 - 4 - 4.77

    Tremlett, C T - 1 - 4 - 0 - 270 - 124 - 4 - 1 - 4.23

    Strauss, A J - 4 - 229 - 6 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 5 - 3.86

    Morgan, E J G - 4 - 194 - 6 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 3 - 3.22

    Bopara, R S - 2 - 51 - 1 - 30 - 13 - 0 - 1 - 2.71

    Trott, I J L - 2 - 98 - 4 - 72 - 41 - 0 - 1 - 2.48

  • spas on August 24, 2011, 14:56 GMT

    @ Vinodmatrix Kumar : no ifs and but s mate.... accept the real no 1 test team.....

  • Shan156 on August 24, 2011, 14:20 GMT

    Why is Broad docked a point? He deserves a perfect 10. One could argue, so does Bell and KP but Broad deserves it more.

    7 for Morgan is too high. He probably deserves a 5. He is still unconvincing at this level even though he scored a century. He had his fair share of luck but you got to make those chances count. He did, but he needs to do a lot more to make people believe that he belongs at this level. The #6 position remains one for debate but which can be easily answered in the short term at least by moving Prior, Bresnan, Broad and Swann one position up and playing Tremlett. We should be playing 5 bowlers against Pakistan in UAE anyway.

    I see a lot of Indian fans think England are over-rated because they only beat a "poor Indian team" (surprising because they are probably missing only Zaheer Khan in their first choice XI), the result will be reversed if England play in India because that is what happened in 2008 (LOL) and what if Swann is injured (Trott, Tremlett anyone)

  • on August 24, 2011, 14:16 GMT

    Giving a 7 to Swann is injustice. People of subcontinent are used to playing spin, and English wickets are not the spinners haven like subcontinent. Yet Swann achieved so much that he deserved a 9.

  • Rorzz on August 24, 2011, 14:15 GMT

    I can't believe some still refuse to accept England are the best team in the world at the moment. ICC player rankings are based on a full years performance, home and away. As it stands, we have 4 batsmen in the top 8, 2 top order, 2 middle order. No other team has more than one. We have 3 bowlers in the top 5, with Tremlett and Bresnan at 10 and 11. Whichever one gets to bowl a full series goes up. So Tremlett, who can't get into the England team, would be first change for SA and would take the new ball for Ind and Aus. And 3 of our bowlers are in the top 8 all-rounders. Again, Bresnan's going up all the time. So our team is a top 6 including 4 of the top 8 batsmen, Matt Prior, an all-rounder with a batting av.of 46 and a bowling av. of 24, followed by 3 of the top five bowlers, including the 2nd best all-rounder at No.9 and the 6th best all-rounder at No.10. We've the best top order, middle-order, keeper, all-rounders, pace attack and spinner. Yet we're not a true No.1?

  • murraymckechnie on August 24, 2011, 14:12 GMT

    Nobody got given 8 ?!!!!!

  • on August 24, 2011, 13:32 GMT

    Who on earth is Ole Gunnar Solksjaer? I've follwed the results of the lower divisions of the World Cricket League, but I haven't follwed Norway's performances in detail. Perhaps he's a Dane. The same applies in Divisions 2 and 3.

  • tjhughes100 on August 24, 2011, 13:30 GMT

    England performed as a team better than India in all facets. There are no excuses for Tendulkar, Laxman, Sehwag, Ghambir for their poor performances with the bat as Dravid so admirably showed. England's bowlers were not perfect but they were very good. India's bowling depth was proved non-existant after Kumar going down but England's batsmen made the most of it. Strauss did not have a good series and with the lower middle order performing so well with the bat, I'd question the need to have Morgan in at six rather than a fifth bowler with the type of tours coming up, especially if a second spinner is needed. However, with Cook, Trott, Pietersen and Bell from 2-5 in such form, it's hard to see England not scoring big runs. I would argue that England are not as good as some are saying, but that just means that there is still room for improvement, and with the recent performances against the two most recent #1 ranked teams, that can only be intimidating to everyone else.

  • Navin84 on August 24, 2011, 13:29 GMT

    Broad deserves more than 9, 9.9 i would say.

  • bobbo2 on August 24, 2011, 13:20 GMT

    I agree with Ipl Hatao Cricket Bachao - IPL is slowly ruining Indian Cricket. Being the number 1 Test team means more than 20 IPL titles. In fact I am a massive cricket fan and I can honestly say I have no idea what franchise won the IPL. Couldn't care less. But I do care that India played so poorly in the series. And India is not even my team.

  • on August 24, 2011, 13:14 GMT

    And dont forget another 4-0 thrashing awaits the over-rated team in Australian shores this summer !!

  • landl47 on August 24, 2011, 13:10 GMT

    Some Indian fans still don't get it. This England team is not playing the same way as England did in 2008 (which was 3 years ago, Vinodmatrix, not two). This England team is prepared and has a strategy to win games from any position and in any conditions. Before this tour, Indian fans assured us that India would win easily. Now that has been shown to be nonsense, the same people say England won't win in India. We were told Swann couldn't get the Indian batsmen, but once he got on a spinning wicket, Swann took 9-208 in the match. Mishra, India's top spinner, took 0-170. If Swann can do that to India in English conditions, what will he do in India? As for back-up, Panesar has been working very hard and has had two great seasons for Sussex. He'll be well suited to Indian conditions. India's batsmen are getting older and they're old now. England will be able to bowl them out. India's bowling will be just as bad in India as it was here. Wake up- England is a better team, in any conditions.

  • DustyBin on August 24, 2011, 13:05 GMT

    Yes. Clearly England will struggle on spinning tracks in India. See what happened when India got them on a spinning track at the Oval...ah wait a minute England spanked them on that as well. Having watched England get spanked for years I'm loving it right now; perhaps the most startling revelation of the last year, is that Aussies are more generous in defeat than Indians. I really can't predict a winner of the forthcoming India -v- Aus series..or when India next play Bangladesh..or Zimbabwe...

  • on August 24, 2011, 12:54 GMT

    @CricIndia 208: Trashing the aussies, then the indians; doctored pitches?!?!?!?! how about the admitances of played like a no. 1 team and trashed the Indians :)))

  • cloudmess on August 24, 2011, 12:54 GMT

    Sat Matharu, Swann gets injured - oops, who is there to replace him? One Monty Panesar, who has already had quite a lot of success at test level, and would be in most other countries' first XI.

  • 5wombats on August 24, 2011, 12:27 GMT

    @Sir_Freddie_Flintoff; I'm with you - Bell should've got man of the series & yes Bell is in prime form - top of the world. I've not always been a big fan of Ian Bell, but god knows - I am now!! Strauss is well underscored here - he'd be 8 in my book. Overall - I didn't find Morgan particularly convincing. He could have done more against this powder puff indian attack and for my money has technical issues against pace/swing. Still - he's waited patiently for his turn and like all the rest he will work to improve. BTW - NICE TO SEE ALL THE USUAL SUSPECTS ON THIS CONVERSATION!! What a happy little family we are right now! Keep having fun guys!!!

  • on August 24, 2011, 12:26 GMT

    Why the hell Bopara has been given 5 marks and strauss 6 marks..They haven't done anything big...Many of the Indian players are also given out for not out...stupid and idiotic marks for England.

  • Naresh28 on August 24, 2011, 12:18 GMT

    GEOFF BOYCOTT WAS SO OUTSPOKEN SO WAS NASIR HUSSEIN. THERE WILL BE OTHER SERIES AND THEY WILL BE MADE TO EAT THEIR WORDS. DONT WRITE INDIA OFF. REMEMBER WE HAVE A BIG COUNTRY AND BIG POPULATION. ITS JUST A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE WE FIND SOMEONE CAPABLE OF DISHING OUT "CHIN MUSIC" THEY HAVE USED WORDS LIKE "DOWNHILL FAST" AND "BANGLADESH" COME ON TEAM INDIA GIVE BACK WHAT YOU GOT.

  • Byrhtferth on August 24, 2011, 12:18 GMT

    Er, CricIndia208, given that you blatantly mean subcontinental wickets perhaps it's worth remembering that slow wickets made for spin are also 'doctored'. Given India's abysmal performance at the Oval compared to England's I think England have less to worry about with Indian wickets than India do... Agree with landl47 though--Morgan over-rated and Strauss under-rated.

  • on August 24, 2011, 12:12 GMT

    TheDoctor394 is spot on - this team is so overrated that it beat Australia 3 times by an innings in their backyard.

    Not the greatest Aussie team and an ageing, tired Indian side that lost Zaheer and clearly gave up mentally, but when was the last time either nation has been so ruthlessly hammered in every facet of the game?

    I don't think England will be exposed because there are holes in the team, every side in history has had holes and if you're worried about the 6th batsman or a back-up spinner, then you haven't got that much to worry about.

    The great sides had all-time great players who cover up the holes. That's what England lack - no Warne/McGrath/Gilchrist, no Richards/Marshall/Holding.....at the moment somebody sticks their hand up when the going gets tough, whether it be from number 9 in the order, a reserve seamer, Cook or Trott batting for days etc. but it would be nice to have an all-time great or two who you know are the best players on the pitch every series.

  • on August 24, 2011, 12:06 GMT

    I know these marks out of 10 are just for fun, but how can say Broad not get a 10. To average 13.84 with the ball and 60.66 with the bat after playing every Test. Not to mention Bell and possibly KP too.

  • on August 24, 2011, 11:35 GMT

    congrats to england.........but i bet this same team if it tours india will be beaten the same way as they were beaten 2years back........it englands good luck that indians were busy counting money which they got from ipl.

  • on August 24, 2011, 11:33 GMT

    England is clearly overrated. Team India was playing like Team IPL. This Team India is IPL servant and completely unfit and useless to play International Cricket or Test Cricket. IPL has taken betting to highest level. IPL is not a Cricketing event it is a worst commerical event. Team India and BCCI is completely focussed on IPL. Because of IPL, Team India is losing skill, inspiration, motivation and fitness to play Test Cricket. These curators, coaches and BCCI officials are working for IPL growth rather than Cricket growth. Until IPL is thrashed, Team India is not going to perform well in other tournaments. IPL is completely meaningless and obsolete Tournament. Test, ODI & T20 Cricket is great to watch between Countries unlike IPL Teams which look like clubs. Test Cricket is ultimate to watch on sportive pitches. But IPL is making these pitches Lifeless.

  • on August 24, 2011, 11:25 GMT

    England were helped by poor opposition but should be wary of the term "what goes around comes around". There are more holes in this team than the media fan club would have you believe. Suppose when they tour India next year, Swann gets injured - Oops who is there to replace him? For a large part of this series Indian batsmen played him with ease; he also had his fair share of luck with umpire decisions. Agree too that Morgan / Bopara are not much cop at this level, a better attack than India's would have sorted them out. Morgan may have scored a hundred at Edgbaston but it was one of the most unconvincing hundreds ever. Cook failed in 5 out of 6 inns, Strauss was even worse - failures against by common consent one of the worst attacks to visit these shores. KP is sweet & happy now, but can be guarnteed to upset an applecart or two in due course, the workload on subcontinent pitches will eventually wear down Bresnan & Broad. England deserve to be number one but still have a lot to prove

  • ambujkumar on August 24, 2011, 11:23 GMT

    It may appeared hard for indian fans to digest that this is a series which india didn't lose its a series that england deserved to win and we must accept that england are a much better side than india in test cricket in all departments be it bowling, batting or fielding.

  • sandson on August 24, 2011, 11:00 GMT

    Pietersen,Broad and Bell deserve a 10. Pieersen has had a stupendous consistent series..Its important to put your hand up first and thats what he did at lords..laying down a marker for others..Broad was unplayable..Bell had a series of his life-time which should make him one of the first names in starting XI..Bresnan,Prior,Anderson get 9..Cook dropped a couple a dollies..Strauss has pulled the strings well..They both get 7. Swann has looked ordinary..When Praveen Kumar was carving him up at edgbaston he knew not where to put the ball..a No.1 spinner running out of ideas is not good..warne might have got pk 3rd or 4th ball by inviting him and deceiving in flight..So Trott,Tremlett and Swann get 6. Not sure about Morgan..against a more lively and varied attack he might be owned..

  • AlanHarrison on August 24, 2011, 10:47 GMT

    @mravikirn: agree Cook is a bit overrated, although only because the runs he scored in this series were scored against such a poor bowling attack. Cook's fielding could perhaps also get a mention: some impressive catches this series from a player who had previously been felt a liability in the field

  • on August 24, 2011, 10:20 GMT

    It's interesting to note the universal praise of the team, yet the captain's contribution to ovearall success is treated with a niggardly 6, justifiable only for Strauss the Batsman whereas Strauss the Captain fully deserves a perfect score of 10. @Leggie - Look no further than to Lancashire's Gary Keedy, by the proverbial country mile the best spinner in the country after Swann and at the age where it is commonly agreed - except by selectors - that spinners are in their prime. A pairing of Swann - Keedy for the subcontinent would be wise.

  • Kapstif on August 24, 2011, 10:14 GMT

    Broad only 9? 25 wickets at 14, an average of over 60 with the bat and all in very important moments when the match and series were still in the balance. Son't forget the hat-trick alslo. What more does he have to do?

  • me54321 on August 24, 2011, 10:14 GMT

    People are also forgetting that Strauss batting as opener, did use up a lot of the new ball in nearly every innings, which is after all an openers main role in swinging and seaming conditions. If he had come in at number 4 or 5, surely he would have got a lot more runs

  • TheDoctor394 on August 24, 2011, 10:01 GMT

    I still can't get over this "Let England prove themselves on other wickets" stuff that so many people say. Doesn't anyone remember the Ashes series last Australian summer??

  • Tigg on August 24, 2011, 9:56 GMT

    I'd boost Strauss to a 7. His cpataincy was excellent and averaging over 38 in England is far from a form slump, it just looks bad compared to KP (533@106.6), Bell (504@84), Prior (271@67.75) and Cook (348@58). Excluding each openers top score Strauss averages nearly 18 runs higher than Cook (28.4 vs 10.8) which shows his consistent starts.

    I'd be tempted to drop cook down to 6 if it wasn't for his close in catching.

    Morgan should drop to 5.5/6. He got a century, albeit far from chanceless, and his fielding was good but, particularly sub continent, should be dropped for Bresnan and a 5 man attack.

    Bopara should be a 4, but that is alrgely due to lack of opportunities. That said he looked awfully scratchy during his first game.

  • Deuce03 on August 24, 2011, 9:52 GMT

    I don't think 7 for Cook is unfair. The principal duty of the opener is to see off the new ball and protect the middle order and Cook did this everywhere except Trent Bridge, even if he didn't score many runs anywhere other than Edgbaston. His fielding was also excellent, despite the drop of Tendulkar at the Oval (albeit not an easy chance).

  • on August 24, 2011, 9:26 GMT

    yes, England are over -rated. They just thrashed so called no. 1 test team in the world 4-0.

  • harshalb on August 24, 2011, 9:21 GMT

    Except Dravidz getting an 8, no Indian gets above 5

  • BifferSpice on August 24, 2011, 9:09 GMT

    yes, mravikiran, barring the 294 he didn't do very well, but why would you bar the 294? it was the highest score by anyone in the entire series. some indian batsmen did NOT do better than that. none did. nor did any englishmen. barring dravid's three centuries, he didn't do very well either.

  • on August 24, 2011, 8:56 GMT

    The statement, in Strauss's paragraph, that England have won 12 Tests by an innings since May 2009 is wrong; the correct figure is a still-very-impressive 10. They have played 12 Tests in that time which were won by an innings, but two of those (against Australia at Headingley and South Africa at Johannesburg) they lost.

  • Nutcutlet on August 24, 2011, 8:42 GMT

    Andy Flower: 10. He got every selection call right and prepared the team to a point that was nigh on perfection. A knighthood would not be misplaced!

  • AJ_Tiger86 on August 24, 2011, 8:12 GMT

    I think Ian Bell desreves a 10 out of 10. He is currently the best batsman in the world. In the last 2 years he has been averaging almost 90 in test match cricket with 8 hundreds. Bell's 235 at the Oval was superb, but I think his 159 at Trent Bridge was better. Remember he came in to bat at 24-1 with England having a deficit of 67 runs. India were well on top at that stage. But on the third morning Bell changed the game with his fluent strokeplay. He scored almost a run a ball in that session. That innings made sure the series became 2-0 instead of 1-1. So, I thought Bell deserved to be the man of the series instead of Broad.

  • WhoCaresAboutIPL on August 24, 2011, 7:57 GMT

    I agree with landl47 - the only thing the skip needs is a big score - several times he did for himself. With all those starts he probably should have done better, but a captain has more to worry about than his own play!

  • Tom_Bowler on August 24, 2011, 7:49 GMT

    Seven for Morgan? He twisted the knife astutely enough during his hundred and his fifty but both times the fatal wounds had already been inflicted. England needed runs from him in both innings at Lords and the first at Trent Bridge and he came up short on each occasion.

  • andysarmy on August 24, 2011, 7:30 GMT

    agree totally with landl47. i always find it bizarre when people talk about 'strauss having a bad series' during a whitewash. he is setting a new tone, and tone - sharp, collective, hardworking - is the biggest difference between this and the rubbish sides of the past. ok here's a deal - we can drop him when his batting average falls below brearley's.

  • BoonBoom on August 24, 2011, 7:23 GMT

    If Sehwag gets 2 after begging a king pair, I dont understand why Cook only gets 7. He should have 70. Alternatively, if Cooks gets 7, Sehwag deserves minus 70!!!

  • Kashi0127 on August 24, 2011, 7:08 GMT

    Broad should be perfect 10

  • on August 24, 2011, 6:59 GMT

    I am amazed that even after a 4-0 defeat in 4 tests, some Indian fans still cannot let go of their pride and say "well played England". England consistantly out played India in all facets of the game, and deserved to win, fair and square. Sure, the conditions favour England's style of play in England, but its no different when India play in India. Its only natural that the home team are the experts of those conditions because they play most of thier games in those conditions. If India can beat England 4-0 in the return series, I will be the first to shake any Indian fan's hand and say "well played". Till then, congratulations to Eng for attaining the No.1 test spot for the 1st time since 1979!

  • BellCurve on August 24, 2011, 6:54 GMT

    @landl47 - Couldn't agree with you more. I would add that Strauss has a rare ability to get the balance right between raw aggression and ruthlessness on the one side, and gentlemanliness and diplomacy on the other. He is a top strategist and knows exactly what he has in each of his players. Dhoni in contrast lacks imagination and often comes across as aloof. His game plan never seems to diverge from the old tried and tested India strategy of batting for three days and hoping it turns on days 4 and 5.

  • mikebcmos on August 24, 2011, 6:45 GMT

    I agree Strauss deserves more for his captaincy, but he also dropped a lot of catches at first slip, some simple ones, and was lucky they didn't end up more costly, which they probably will be in the subcontinent. The captaincy seems to have affected his concentration and his game, hopefully now he's more used to it and more confident you'll be able to work on his game and get that back up to scratch. Prior deserves maybe a seven I thought he made too many mistakes with the spinning ball, difficult of course but that's his job, he missed stumpings and catches and byes off Swann, letting him down several times, and you can't say the ball did anything unexpected, it did exactly what Swann was trying to get it to do. He needs to improve his technique in anticipation against the spinning ball, especially for the subcontinent. Broad clearly stood out among the bowlers, as his figures prove, add to that his runs, fielding and the series turning performance at Trent Bridge, must be a 10

  • on August 24, 2011, 6:22 GMT

    Congratulations England! I thought AC (Alastair Cook) should have gotten higher marks than what he got. KP, Bell, and the rest - Well done!

  • mravikiran on August 24, 2011, 5:45 GMT

    Alistair Cook - 7. Not justifiable. Barring one innings of 294, he scored 54 in 5 innings - some Indian batsmen did better than this.

    How many ever runs a batsman scores in an innings, it can only help win that match. It cannot be distributed to other innings. A man of the match is sufficient for that effort which he got. He did nothing in other 5 innings to help England for the wins.

  • on August 24, 2011, 5:45 GMT

    I feel Tremlet could do well in subcontinent

  • Leggie on August 24, 2011, 5:31 GMT

    England certainly deserve high marks for the excellent performance against India. The marks are also a true reflection of their performance against India. There are a few areas where England are likely to suffer in the future. 1. Strauss has been in poor form for too long. That he failed to score a hundred against one of the most bowling friendly attacks must be a cause for concern. Will the opening pair be tinkered with? 2. The likes of Eoin Morgon / Bopara not scaling up even against this attack. The middle order backup appears empty. 3. England's lack of spinners when they play in the subcontinent.

  • _NEUTRAL_Fan_ on August 24, 2011, 4:46 GMT

    Tremlett should get a 6, Swann gets a 7 probably for his decent batting and good catching. Anderson should have gotten 8 not 9. Bresnan and Broad should have gotten 10. Ian Bell should have gotten a 10, what a graceful batsman.

  • landl47 on August 24, 2011, 4:06 GMT

    To give Strauss only 6 is to make a major understatement of his contribution. Although he didn't go on to make a big score, he only once fell for under 20 (and that was 16) and an average of 38 was, if not his best, at least acceptable. However, as captain, he had a superb series. The strategy was almost flawless, his ability to get the most out of his players was stronger than ever and his unrelenting intensity ensured that England was always ready to seize any opportunities that arose; the last test being the best example, when 262-3 became 283 all out because he had kept his men up for the job. I've seen every great captain from Richie Benaud on, and Strauss' ability to keep his side focussed is the equal of any of them. To rank him lower than, say, Eoin Morgan is simply not right; his contribution was at least as great as anyone's on the side. Good leadership is intangible, but it is none the less as important as any other skill- I would say more so.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • landl47 on August 24, 2011, 4:06 GMT

    To give Strauss only 6 is to make a major understatement of his contribution. Although he didn't go on to make a big score, he only once fell for under 20 (and that was 16) and an average of 38 was, if not his best, at least acceptable. However, as captain, he had a superb series. The strategy was almost flawless, his ability to get the most out of his players was stronger than ever and his unrelenting intensity ensured that England was always ready to seize any opportunities that arose; the last test being the best example, when 262-3 became 283 all out because he had kept his men up for the job. I've seen every great captain from Richie Benaud on, and Strauss' ability to keep his side focussed is the equal of any of them. To rank him lower than, say, Eoin Morgan is simply not right; his contribution was at least as great as anyone's on the side. Good leadership is intangible, but it is none the less as important as any other skill- I would say more so.

  • _NEUTRAL_Fan_ on August 24, 2011, 4:46 GMT

    Tremlett should get a 6, Swann gets a 7 probably for his decent batting and good catching. Anderson should have gotten 8 not 9. Bresnan and Broad should have gotten 10. Ian Bell should have gotten a 10, what a graceful batsman.

  • Leggie on August 24, 2011, 5:31 GMT

    England certainly deserve high marks for the excellent performance against India. The marks are also a true reflection of their performance against India. There are a few areas where England are likely to suffer in the future. 1. Strauss has been in poor form for too long. That he failed to score a hundred against one of the most bowling friendly attacks must be a cause for concern. Will the opening pair be tinkered with? 2. The likes of Eoin Morgon / Bopara not scaling up even against this attack. The middle order backup appears empty. 3. England's lack of spinners when they play in the subcontinent.

  • on August 24, 2011, 5:45 GMT

    I feel Tremlet could do well in subcontinent

  • mravikiran on August 24, 2011, 5:45 GMT

    Alistair Cook - 7. Not justifiable. Barring one innings of 294, he scored 54 in 5 innings - some Indian batsmen did better than this.

    How many ever runs a batsman scores in an innings, it can only help win that match. It cannot be distributed to other innings. A man of the match is sufficient for that effort which he got. He did nothing in other 5 innings to help England for the wins.

  • on August 24, 2011, 6:22 GMT

    Congratulations England! I thought AC (Alastair Cook) should have gotten higher marks than what he got. KP, Bell, and the rest - Well done!

  • mikebcmos on August 24, 2011, 6:45 GMT

    I agree Strauss deserves more for his captaincy, but he also dropped a lot of catches at first slip, some simple ones, and was lucky they didn't end up more costly, which they probably will be in the subcontinent. The captaincy seems to have affected his concentration and his game, hopefully now he's more used to it and more confident you'll be able to work on his game and get that back up to scratch. Prior deserves maybe a seven I thought he made too many mistakes with the spinning ball, difficult of course but that's his job, he missed stumpings and catches and byes off Swann, letting him down several times, and you can't say the ball did anything unexpected, it did exactly what Swann was trying to get it to do. He needs to improve his technique in anticipation against the spinning ball, especially for the subcontinent. Broad clearly stood out among the bowlers, as his figures prove, add to that his runs, fielding and the series turning performance at Trent Bridge, must be a 10

  • BellCurve on August 24, 2011, 6:54 GMT

    @landl47 - Couldn't agree with you more. I would add that Strauss has a rare ability to get the balance right between raw aggression and ruthlessness on the one side, and gentlemanliness and diplomacy on the other. He is a top strategist and knows exactly what he has in each of his players. Dhoni in contrast lacks imagination and often comes across as aloof. His game plan never seems to diverge from the old tried and tested India strategy of batting for three days and hoping it turns on days 4 and 5.

  • on August 24, 2011, 6:59 GMT

    I am amazed that even after a 4-0 defeat in 4 tests, some Indian fans still cannot let go of their pride and say "well played England". England consistantly out played India in all facets of the game, and deserved to win, fair and square. Sure, the conditions favour England's style of play in England, but its no different when India play in India. Its only natural that the home team are the experts of those conditions because they play most of thier games in those conditions. If India can beat England 4-0 in the return series, I will be the first to shake any Indian fan's hand and say "well played". Till then, congratulations to Eng for attaining the No.1 test spot for the 1st time since 1979!

  • Kashi0127 on August 24, 2011, 7:08 GMT

    Broad should be perfect 10