West Indies in England 2012 May 29, 2012

Saker rates attack as good as great Australians

299

David Saker, the England bowling coach, has said England's bowling attack is "as good as" the great Australian attack that dominated world cricket for more than a decade.

Saker, the 46-year-old Australian, was appointed to the England role in April 2010. Before that, however, he had played with and against some of Australia's finest cricketers as a fast bowler with Victoria and Tasmania. He was also assistant coach of the Victoria side that lifted two Sheffield Shield titles and of the Delhi Daredevils side that played in the 2009 Champions League. He is, therefore, well placed to offer informed views on the subject.

"We should be saying our group is as good as them," Saker said. "You can compare them. The Australians were stand-out bowlers, a great group for a long time and they also had a world-class spinner. Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne in tandem were amazing, but I have seen some spells from Jimmy Anderson and Graeme Swann that have been just as good or better at times. It's important we don't forget the ability of Swanny when he comes in around the three quicks. That's really important.

"McGrath was the stand-out in that group but they had Brett Lee, Jason Gillespie and Andy Bichel, too: they were all fantastic bowlers. It's a bit like when Jimmy and Swann bowl together - it is not unlike McGrath and Warne at times. There is so much pressure on the batsmen.

Craig McDermott's departure from Australia's bowling coach role has created a vacancy back in Saker's home country, but there appears little chance of him being persuaded to leave the England job such is his admiration for their talent.

"In Sri Lanka, there were a couple of times, especially late on day four in the second Test, those two reminded me so much of McGrath and Warne. They put so much pressure on the Sri Lanka batting group and the wickets fell. They also have the back-up of some really good quicks as well, which is nice to have."

That 'back-up' may have an opportunity in the next Test. With England having secured a series-clinching victory over West Indies at Trent Bridge, England are considering resting James Anderson and, perhaps, Stuart Broad, and allowing Steven Finn and Graeme Onions an opportunity to adapt to Test cricket. While Saker understands that Anderson and Broad will be keen to play in Birmingham, he believes that England's strength in depth is such that even if they missed the Test, the quality of the attack would hardly be diminished.

"There's no doubt that the likes of Anderson and Broad will want to play as it gives them more chance of taking Test wickets. But if they have a Test off here and there, in my opinion, it probably gives them the chance to play longer. Those wickets can be picked up later because their careers will be longer. So there are two ways of looking at it.

"We have a lot of hard cricket ahead, Tests and one-dayers, and we need to make a decision for the good of English cricket. All our bowlers at Trent Bridge normally play in all three forms of the game so we have to be mindful of trying to give them a rest. But we also have to be mindful that nobody really wants to give up their place, which is fair enough, they are very proud of playing for their country. We have to assess that closely.

"If Finn and Onions were to play, I don't think we would lose too much. That's the beauty of it. Obviously, you would lose your top two bowlers, but the quality of the guys coming in is high. They will step up and do a great job. We showed that in Australia when we lost Broad and then Finn lost his spot. A lot of people were very dubious about whether we had the cover but we did. That proved the group of six or seven bowlers can all do a job if they get the opportunity.

Steven Finn has made no secret of his frustration at not being able to force his way back into the line-up and Saker appreciates that waiting on the sidelines can be tough when a bowler feels in good form.

"I'm sure Finn is very frustrated," he said. "The selectors pick the best team to try to win a game but I'm sure Finn will get his chance. He is still young. He is very exciting and his one-day form over the last 12-18 months has been outstanding. He will have a lot of cricket ahead of him. In an ideal world, we would love to get him in. But we have three fast bowlers doing a really good job."

Saker has been particularly impressed with the bowlers' ability to adapt to conditions as required. England were anticipating being able to utilise green wickets and conventional swing in the Test series against West Indies. Instead, however, they have been confronted with two slow, low wickets and conditions that have offered little assistance.

"The wickets have probably been flatter than we are used to in England," he said. "In that sense, it was really good that we took 20 wickets in each match. At times, it was really difficult because the batsmen dug in - particularly Chanderpaul and Samuels. We found it hard to dismiss them. I was really proud of the way the bowlers kept slogging away and got the breakthroughs. The reverse swing late on day three at Trent Bridge helped us out a bit as well. And the DRS helps as well with the lbws. The boys were outstanding. We applied a lot of pressure.

"This group is very skilful. What they do really well is assess conditions quickly. They will see if it is swinging and, if so, they will stick to our original plans. If it is not doing that, they will come up with some other plan. They are very good at talking out in the middle. Stuart and Jimmy are very good at that and they pass on that message to the rest of the group. To be able to bowl conventional swing and they say 'this is not going to work' and then switch to reverse and attack in different ways - that is a huge weapon to have."

George Dobell is a senior correspondent at ESPNcricinfo

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • on June 11, 2012, 13:32 GMT

    This is most rediclous i have even read , " Macgrath and Warne" were the greatest pair of bowlers in the history of test cricket . One is without doubt the best test fast bowler ever and second is best legspinner ever to have played the game. Jimmy is good bowler but how can you compare Jimmy with great Glenn Macgrath, look at their averages. wheares Macgrath use to give away 21 runs per wicket , jimmy gives 30. 10 runs more per wicket. Warne and Swan is like comapring a magican with a sceintist, have any other bowler is history forced opnonents to take cycatrist appointment ?

    Swany and Jimmy are good , but Macgrath and Warne were graetest ever. JImmy never have to bowl against Tendulker in his prime ( although he is ever green ) , and Swan never have to bowl against a certain Brain C. Lara.

  • HLANGL on June 1, 2012, 14:46 GMT

    @JG2704 on (May 31 2012, 20:11 PM GMT): "@HLANGL on (May 31 2012, 08:36 AM GMT) Ok - fair play , it wasn't convincingly but it was fair and square. Also which match did we win by 1 wicket?". Sorry, it should have been by 3 wickets, mentioning it to be by 1 wicket is my mistake. After all, this has become kind of a brainstorm session, hehe.

  • on June 1, 2012, 10:48 GMT

    Good to talk the 'bowling unit' up but Saker's going a bit over the top in his comments. Anderson and Swann 'better' at times than the McGrath and Warne? Really? How does it get better than them at their best? Wanting to be as good as, would be a more realistic appraisal. As already pointed out, South Africa will be an acid test. England are good and hopefully they will get even better. Only time will tell how good they actually turns out to be.

  • on June 1, 2012, 6:44 GMT

    Please tell me this is a Page 2 Humor section . What next Ian Bell is next Don Bradman ... All i can accept is Anderson, Broad , Bresnan and Swann are better batsmen and fielder compared to Lee, Warne , Gillespie and McGrath ....

  • Meety on June 1, 2012, 3:27 GMT

    @Bollo - yes, your 2nd post is pretty interesting. I think its much more comparable to compare the current England line up v Oz current line up. No one in their right mind would say Oz's current line up is better than the McGrath/Warne & co line up, yet STATISTICALLY the current Oz bowlers are better than the current Pom line up! Fact is most England fans would laugh at any such comparison & they would point to less games & experiences in different conditions.......... LOL!

  • JG2704 on May 31, 2012, 20:15 GMT

    @Saffie1987 on (May 31 2012, 09:13 AM GMT) - Maybe your team's attitude has been reflecting yours all this time which is why they are drawing more series than they win? Maybe they will become a great unit but they have to win more series if they do.

  • JG2704 on May 31, 2012, 20:11 GMT

    @HLANGL on (May 31 2012, 08:36 AM GMT) Ok - fair play , it wasn't convincingly but it was fair and square. Also which match did we win by 1 wicket?

  • JG2704 on May 31, 2012, 20:07 GMT

    @RandyOZ on (May 31 2012, 10:00 AM GMT) Those players you mentioned weren't even playing cricket when the great WI side were around

  • g.narsimha on May 31, 2012, 15:53 GMT

    SCREAMINGEAGLE(ON-31-5-12-AT-09-38) BRAVO MAN cant ask more .Let me make it clear one thing in advance, even if win as happening for decades in INDIA ,He wil not achnowlegde , only mettrs E NG home heroics , none others .

  • wonderstar1 on May 31, 2012, 14:51 GMT

    @5wombats.haha mate u r very funny.why do u keep talking abt Indias lat tour of Eng all time. Obviously, India didnt do well and it showed in result and no doubt Eng walloped India. But what abt their previous tours to England where they won in 2007 and also drew in 2002 apart from winning the famous natwest final. Tell me when was the last time England beat India in ODI in India. I can only remember the thrashings they got in India. England won the test series after 15 yrs of gap between 1996-2011 against India. in between these most of the series were won by India and some were drawn series. Now tell me who has the upper hand overall . let alone ODIs which India always dominates aganist England.

  • on June 11, 2012, 13:32 GMT

    This is most rediclous i have even read , " Macgrath and Warne" were the greatest pair of bowlers in the history of test cricket . One is without doubt the best test fast bowler ever and second is best legspinner ever to have played the game. Jimmy is good bowler but how can you compare Jimmy with great Glenn Macgrath, look at their averages. wheares Macgrath use to give away 21 runs per wicket , jimmy gives 30. 10 runs more per wicket. Warne and Swan is like comapring a magican with a sceintist, have any other bowler is history forced opnonents to take cycatrist appointment ?

    Swany and Jimmy are good , but Macgrath and Warne were graetest ever. JImmy never have to bowl against Tendulker in his prime ( although he is ever green ) , and Swan never have to bowl against a certain Brain C. Lara.

  • HLANGL on June 1, 2012, 14:46 GMT

    @JG2704 on (May 31 2012, 20:11 PM GMT): "@HLANGL on (May 31 2012, 08:36 AM GMT) Ok - fair play , it wasn't convincingly but it was fair and square. Also which match did we win by 1 wicket?". Sorry, it should have been by 3 wickets, mentioning it to be by 1 wicket is my mistake. After all, this has become kind of a brainstorm session, hehe.

  • on June 1, 2012, 10:48 GMT

    Good to talk the 'bowling unit' up but Saker's going a bit over the top in his comments. Anderson and Swann 'better' at times than the McGrath and Warne? Really? How does it get better than them at their best? Wanting to be as good as, would be a more realistic appraisal. As already pointed out, South Africa will be an acid test. England are good and hopefully they will get even better. Only time will tell how good they actually turns out to be.

  • on June 1, 2012, 6:44 GMT

    Please tell me this is a Page 2 Humor section . What next Ian Bell is next Don Bradman ... All i can accept is Anderson, Broad , Bresnan and Swann are better batsmen and fielder compared to Lee, Warne , Gillespie and McGrath ....

  • Meety on June 1, 2012, 3:27 GMT

    @Bollo - yes, your 2nd post is pretty interesting. I think its much more comparable to compare the current England line up v Oz current line up. No one in their right mind would say Oz's current line up is better than the McGrath/Warne & co line up, yet STATISTICALLY the current Oz bowlers are better than the current Pom line up! Fact is most England fans would laugh at any such comparison & they would point to less games & experiences in different conditions.......... LOL!

  • JG2704 on May 31, 2012, 20:15 GMT

    @Saffie1987 on (May 31 2012, 09:13 AM GMT) - Maybe your team's attitude has been reflecting yours all this time which is why they are drawing more series than they win? Maybe they will become a great unit but they have to win more series if they do.

  • JG2704 on May 31, 2012, 20:11 GMT

    @HLANGL on (May 31 2012, 08:36 AM GMT) Ok - fair play , it wasn't convincingly but it was fair and square. Also which match did we win by 1 wicket?

  • JG2704 on May 31, 2012, 20:07 GMT

    @RandyOZ on (May 31 2012, 10:00 AM GMT) Those players you mentioned weren't even playing cricket when the great WI side were around

  • g.narsimha on May 31, 2012, 15:53 GMT

    SCREAMINGEAGLE(ON-31-5-12-AT-09-38) BRAVO MAN cant ask more .Let me make it clear one thing in advance, even if win as happening for decades in INDIA ,He wil not achnowlegde , only mettrs E NG home heroics , none others .

  • wonderstar1 on May 31, 2012, 14:51 GMT

    @5wombats.haha mate u r very funny.why do u keep talking abt Indias lat tour of Eng all time. Obviously, India didnt do well and it showed in result and no doubt Eng walloped India. But what abt their previous tours to England where they won in 2007 and also drew in 2002 apart from winning the famous natwest final. Tell me when was the last time England beat India in ODI in India. I can only remember the thrashings they got in India. England won the test series after 15 yrs of gap between 1996-2011 against India. in between these most of the series were won by India and some were drawn series. Now tell me who has the upper hand overall . let alone ODIs which India always dominates aganist England.

  • heathrf1974 on May 31, 2012, 14:25 GMT

    South Africa will be a good test to see how good England are. One this is for sure they struggle against quality spin. I think Narine will do well in the third test.

  • on May 31, 2012, 12:36 GMT

    @Front_Foot_Lunge Mate its the other way around actually you are the one who doesnt understand cricket.

  • AdrianVanDenStael on May 31, 2012, 12:35 GMT

    @Randy: 'McGrath never lost a series 5-0. This was the same series Flintoff, Panesar, Hoggard, Ajmal and Giles had their careers terminated at the hands of the greatest cricket team to ever walk onto a cricket ground.' Wholeheartedly though I agree with you that Anderson is nothing like as good as McGrath, I have to say that only 1 of the 5 players you mentioned ended their careers with the 5-0 defeat in the 2006-7 Ashes. Hoggard played on after that series, Flintoff actually ended his career in 2009 with a victory over Australia, and Panesar still plays for England (occassionally). As for Saaed Ajmal, he plays for Pakistan, not England, so I don't know how you think what happens in an Ashes series could have any bearing on his career whatsoever.

  • hokum on May 31, 2012, 12:21 GMT

    Mr. Anderson is mirror image of Wasim Akram. He got extra consistency, pace and at least 4 more variation than Wasim. So, certainly this makes greatest bowler ever in cricket field. Unfortunately, he is not good enough to represent England's T20 team (Obviously it's not REAL cricket). Mr. Broad bowls like Malcolm Marshall and bats like Jayasuriya. He has been smashed for 6 sixes in an over (OMG, this is also T20 we can skip it). Mr. Bresnan has better batting and bowling average than Hadlee, Imran Khan and Kapil Dev. If we consider 100% win then he is better than Garry Sobers and Kallis (Poor people who doesn't know how to win matches). Mr. Swann is better than Warne and Murali. His current age is 33. Based on English standards, he will be bowling for another 3 years. He is about to end up with most number of wickets (200 wickets per year).

  • 5wombats on May 31, 2012, 10:53 GMT

    @Marcio. Mate - how are those predictive skills you are so fond of telling us about? I know you bet your shirt on an Australia victory at Sydney. I'm still Living like a King on my winnings. So, how is life for you without a shirt? :-0

  • Romenevans on May 31, 2012, 10:06 GMT

    @ Valavan - Whole world knows SA got the best test bowling attack. Accept it.

  • RandyOZ on May 31, 2012, 10:00 GMT

    Yeah Andersen is as good as McGrath.....gimme a break. McGrath never lost a series 5-0. This was the same series Flintoff, Panesar, Hoggard, Ajmal and Giles had their careers terminated at the hands of the greatest cricket team to ever walk onto a cricket ground.

  • Front_Foot_Lunge on May 31, 2012, 9:49 GMT

    Clearly those who are looking at statistics don't understand cricket. Who cares about how many wickets Warne took? Swann is still better. Who cares about how many wickets McGrath took? Anderson is clearly better.

  • screamingeagle on May 31, 2012, 9:38 GMT

    So...nice to see wombats again, with his brand of logic. Before you start spewing scorn on all other teams, more so on India (but then that is your issue, not mine) England is not really the best team you think it is. By the same yardstick you applied when other teams were no.1, first make sure you win in all conditions before yapping. I would love to see how the SA series turns out, and then (by your standards) playing against the laughable Indian team in India. Once you have whitewashed both teams, we can talk. As regards the bowling, yes it is decent, but anywhere close to the Aussie one. Maybe soon you might start comparisions with the WI team of yore? Anyway, best of luck for the SA series.

  • Saffie1987 on May 31, 2012, 9:13 GMT

    South-Africa doesn't even have to play at their very best to defeat England! Plus Sa's bowling attack is going to end up as being one of the best ever alongside the Windies of the 1980's and the Aussies of the 2000's!

  • Bollo on May 31, 2012, 8:59 GMT

    I suppose if David Saker thinks this English bowling line-up should be comparing themselves to the recent Aussie attacks, then good luck to him.

    Statistics tell a rather different story though - combined;

    McGrath/Warne/Gillespie/Lee: 1840 wickets, ave.25.3, SR. 54.7

    Anderson/Broad/Bresnan/Swann: 668 wickets, ave.29.3, SR. 57.9

    The current Aussie bowlers don`t look too bad in comparison either;

    Siddle (117 wickets at 29.3), Hilfenhaus (92 at 28.0), Watson (59 at 28.9), Harris (47 at 23.6), Lyon (42 at 27.8), Pattinson (26 at 19.0)...

  • HLANGL on May 31, 2012, 8:36 GMT

    @JG2704 on (May 30 2012, 22:30 PM GMT): Even if you include that drawn test, say Eng won it by 15 runs or so, that tells a finall outcome of 3-1 win for England. But when you have a closer look by taking the win/loss margines, England's 3 wins would have been by 1 wicket, 2 runs & 15 runs (say Eng won the drawn game too) & none of them had come with any early declarations of innings either. But in contrast they lost a game by 200+ runs. "5wombats on (May 30 2012, 08:53 AM GMT) " had mentioned that Eng won "quite convincingly" in Ashes 2005. Would that term "convincingly" make any sense here ?. Can you ever call it a "convincing" win ?. Sorry, all I tried to show was that, may be Eng won Ashes 2005, still it was never the most convincing win anyone would like to boast about.

  • Marcio on May 31, 2012, 8:00 GMT

    Yes @5wombats. The only games that count are the ones that Eng win. The ones they lose are pointless. Sweet indeed.

  • JG2704 on May 31, 2012, 7:57 GMT

    @ Marcio on (May 31 2012, 01:07 AM GMT) So by your way of thinking Eng actually had a bad tour of Australia but then I suppose that would say that we had a successful tour of UAE as we lost 4 but won 6 of the matches. The team may not be great , but greatness is a thing that's earnt over time.

  • Sanjiyan on May 31, 2012, 7:29 GMT

    Warne alone took 40 more wickets than this current england attack combined. Gillespie, who was more of a support bowler, has only a couple of wickets less than Englands main weapon Anderson. World beaters eh? Untill these guys domiante batting attacks the world over they will be nothing more than a really good setup, which they are. @Valavan None of the English bowlers come even close to steyns stats atm. Give credit where its due.

  • 5wombats on May 31, 2012, 6:08 GMT

    @Marcio. Surprised at you; "England won only 5 of the total 14 tour games against Australia, LOSING EIGHT and drawing one". You know perfectly well that the ODI series was an example of mindless over-scheduling and cashing in by CA. Both teams went out of the WC at the same stage in any event. The thing I noticed was that in all of those 5 England wins - you never gave credit for a single one. And 3 of them were ones that really counted. 3 Innings victories, and Ponting losing his job. Sweet.

  • dickoco on May 31, 2012, 5:55 GMT

    Only another 520 test wickets for Swann and 296 test wickets for Anderson (who might as well reduce is average by 10) to even be considered comparable to the greats!! Win 16 tests in a row and then I'll be impressed. And Strauss and Cook are better than Hayden and Langer.. I think you'll find they average just over 40 while Hayden and Langer where over 50.

  • Valavan on May 31, 2012, 5:31 GMT

    @Kavindeven, they have just dale steyn above, Morkel and philander is not in the same league, comon 7 tests and immediately philander up there, Morkel is just an average bowler like Nel, Langaveldt. Dale steyn is acceptable, but anyway England have the pace battery, wishing them to clinch the win against SA and more yawning to follow by the hapless Indians who still think they are best after sound thrashing by England and followed by Aussies. cricinfo please pblish.

  • skepticaloptimist on May 31, 2012, 5:11 GMT

    Wow! No doubt, this line-up is good, but it's just premature - notice, I didn't say wrong or stupid - to make comparisons with the mighty Aussie attack. One, this bowling attack just hasn't been around for long enough. The same reasons as you don't say Darren Bravo is as good as Lara, or Kohli as Tendulkar. Everyone needs to withstand the test of time, and conclusions can only be made after the English attack hangs around for as long as the Aussie attack. Two, their success has largely been limited to Australia and England. Again, it would be unfair to make conclusions, because they haven't exactly gotten many chances in the subcontinent. Chances will come with time. Lastly, the variety of batting they've faced is simply not close to what the Aussie one did. Again, this one, too, will come with time. They are certainly one of the best bowling attacks right now, but putting them with all-time greats would just be premature. Let's give it some time and then see.

  • Romenevans on May 31, 2012, 4:22 GMT

    They should first get pass Dale Steyn, Morkel and Phlander, Yawwwwwwn! and then they need to perform in Asia....then we'll think about that. Till then keep dreaming.

  • Romenevans on May 31, 2012, 4:19 GMT

    Its an insult to Mcgrath, Warne and Gillespie. 'nuff said.

  • AjayB on May 31, 2012, 3:27 GMT

    And Strauss and Cook are better than Hayden and Langer. One swallow does make a summer.

  • Marcio on May 31, 2012, 1:07 GMT

    Yeah, all this hype is simply silly. Australia with Warne and McGrath dominated all forms of th game. So did the great WI teams of the 80s. But this England team regualrly gets thrashed in ODIs, and hasn't fared well overseas. It might pay to recall that on the last much-hyped Ashes tour to Australia, England won only 5 of the total 14 tour games against Australia, LOSING EIGHT and drawing one. That is the bigger picture. How can you calll that a great team?

  • Meety on May 30, 2012, 22:51 GMT

    @razorhedge - there's not much else to talk about.

  • Chris_P on May 30, 2012, 22:50 GMT

    @5wombats. My friend, your guys won "quite convincingly" in 2005? You mean the 2-1 scoreline where McGrath didn't play either of the 2 tests you won? And the same series where you won by a couple of runs after Gillespie was incorrectly given out by Bowden when his hand was off the bat? Your blue/white/red blinkers are a little too tightly strapped on methinks. I guess the 2006/07 series was a tight series and Australia were fortunate to get the luck of the bounce? *Grins* Talk to you next year my friend!

  • Perera32 on May 30, 2012, 22:47 GMT

    I was refering to the West Indies not India. And you seriously think England are as good as Warne and McGrath were in Asian Conditions.

  • Meety on May 30, 2012, 22:46 GMT

    @Bollo - well said. Regarding Kasper, it also has to be remembered that a fair chunk of his matches were in India, as he was almost an "asian specialist", so his stats are in some ways a heck of a lot better than they look!

  • Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas on May 30, 2012, 22:32 GMT

    Guys, please chill. This is getting very silly now. English bowlers are really good. No doubt about that. Even Dravid pinpointed at Anderson and Swann before we toured them last year. No one made fun of Dravid at that time because he was measured in his opinion. But it's OTT comments like these coming from media that make for a good laugh. But now somebody from the coaching staff is coming up with really amusing comments. That's sad apart from being extremely hilarious.

  • JG2704 on May 30, 2012, 22:30 GMT

    @g.narsimha on (May 30 2012, 14:56 PM GMT) It was 4 straight defeats followed by a win - but don't let the truth get in the way of your comms and as you put we did actually draw in SL (not a defeat). I like the way you use umpiring decisions and the phrase "singlehandadly robbed us of an deserving series win" . You sound very balanced there.

  • JG2704 on May 30, 2012, 22:30 GMT

    @gbqdgj on (May 30 2012, 13:06 PM GMT) Just pick you up on one point - it was T20 where Broad was whacked for 6x6 and I'm sure the person you are talking to will respond with a satisfactory answer --- NOT

  • JG2704 on May 30, 2012, 22:30 GMT

    @csowmi7 on (May 30 2012, 09:44 AM GMT) Funnily enough after looking at a scorecard from late 2008 early 2009 from when SA won in Aus , most of the big names - Warne,Mcgrath,Langer,Gilchrist had already retired but no one notices that. It's only when Eng beat them that folk notice they are without all those greats. The ageing India side were only 6-8 months older than the one which drew in South Africa and were number 1 before the series. BTW the only player who was out for the whole series was Khan. Statistically Bresnan is our best bowler so being that he was out for the Pak/UAE tour that renders that particular series as irrelevant - am I right?

  • JG2704 on May 30, 2012, 22:30 GMT

    @HLANGL on (May 30 2012, 16:38 PM GMT) re "still it could have been a 3-0 win for Austrailia were they able to finish off the 2 games they eventually lost to England" - thing is it wasn't and Eng won 2-1. Also I guess you forget the test where Aus were hanging on for dear life 9 wkts down. Also if we're going into the what could have been mode - Eng could/should have won in UAE and SL had it not been for our woeful batting but if we are to take that on the chin then surely we can enjoy our successes too

  • razorhedge on May 30, 2012, 21:37 GMT

    Four words. ROFL. And I'm the queen of England. Sure we would all like to think highly of ourselves, but rubbish comparisons with Mcgrath and Warne are not even funny. This England bowling lineup first needs to match the likes of Warne and Saqlain/Mushtaq Ahmed before getting compared to Aussie Greats. Seriously its hardly been over a year since they have been doing well in tests. Aussies dominated for a decade, for God's sake. Shame 300 ppl need to write about this even.

  • on May 30, 2012, 21:03 GMT

    Wow Swann and Anderson are no where near Warne and Mc Grath. What on earth has he been having for breakfast?? If u take isolated incidents you can say that Swann is as good a batsman as Tendulkar because he scored 20 runs in the last 10 minutes and played some cracking shots that at times looked better than some of the shots Tendulkar played.

  • on May 30, 2012, 20:18 GMT

    This article literally left me in tears. Some of the funniest stuff I've read in a while. Anderson + Swann = McGrath + Warne? Hahaha! Not only is that comparison ridiculous, but even implying that this England team ranks with any of the Australian juggernauts of the previous decade is preposterous. This is a team that lost 4 out of its last 5 Tests before the Wisden Trophy series started, people. Wake up.

  • HLANGL on May 30, 2012, 17:14 GMT

    England may be thriving, still I cannot see any comparison with the 2000-2007 Austrailian side even if you focus on bowling alone. Aus had the pacers in the calibre of McGrath, Gillespie, Lee who'd run through any batting lineup. The back up pacers in the calibre of Damien Fleming, Andrew Bichel, Michael Kasprowicz too would have built decent international careers had they not been under the constant shadow of McGrath, Gillespie & Lee. Aus had Stuart MacGill who could have easily captured at least 400 test wickets had not his career so unfortunately coincided with that of Warne. Brad Hogg was quite decent too, though may not be great. In all probability I'd back an attack consisting of McGrath, Gillespie, Lee, Warne & MacGill compared to an attack consisting of Anderson, Broad, Finn, Swann, etc. Having said that, there can be hiccups (not humiliations !) to any great side like what Aus found in Ashes 2005, still the long term consistancy matters far more than few hiccups in between.

  • tests_the_best on May 30, 2012, 17:07 GMT

    A lot is made about eng bowlers having credited themselves in UAE/SL without considering that pak batting is one of the weakest going around and sl at that time were woefully out of form, even aus won in sl earlier fairly comfortably with just a decent bowling attack.

  • screamingeagle on May 30, 2012, 17:06 GMT

    The English attack is good, but once people start making these huge comparisions, then the fun starts. So, maybe, it would be nice if these bowlers actually play in all conditions and produce similar results, then we start comparing them with the greats. Swann and Warne. Well, that rates a good laugh. One a honest trier, other a genius. Anderson and McGarth? One a legend, other like a curate's egg...for now, anyway.

  • Deuce03 on May 30, 2012, 17:05 GMT

    Oh, it's worth noting that Australia weren't invincible in the early years after they became #1, either. They lost three of their first five away matches after beating the WI to take the title (one vs India, one vs SA, one vs England). Warne and McGrath (et al) were mighty fine players, but they still lost games. Australia's dominance in the late 90s was built primarily on home wins, just as India's success was from 2009-2011 and England's is now.

  • Muttee on May 30, 2012, 17:03 GMT

    A lot of people mentioned that these two were excellent in UAE and their batsmen were the main culprits. True but let's put that into context. Anderson(9)+Swann(13) = 22 Wickets with averages of 27 and 25 respectively. Let's compare it to Saeed Ajmal alone. He took 24 wickets, yes 2 more wickets than the 2 GREAT bowlers combined at an average of 14.70. Yes you read it right. Another context should be, Anderson and Co were bowling to a below average Batting unit of Pakistan and Ajmal was bowling to the best batting unit in the world (some were claiming at the time) of that time. Does that put it in enough context? Swann was not even the best bowler from his country (panesar took 14 wickets and played one less match) let alone in the world. Comparing him to Warne is a sin in itself. He can't even be compared to Ajmal, Rehman or Panesar for that matter. I rest my case.

  • 2.14istherunrate on May 30, 2012, 16:55 GMT

    The fact is that this is about NOW, not 10-15 years ago. The Aussies here have their minds so stuck in the past that they just cannot get over themselves. Nor the odd Indian here. it's pathetic. The English attack is happening NOW not in the past. Whatever Warne or McGrath achieved it was a while ago. it's no use to say that Warne and McGrath were not there on the last Ashes series and use that as an excuse. Of course they were not, any more than Marshall was there in 2000 in Ev WI series. As far as i can see you Aussies are probably in for a good thrashing in the next 3 Ashes series. Enjoy!!! then we will see who is and who is not great. And the Indians should remeber that half their side failed to turn up fit because they wanted the dosh rather than play Tests- hell, some of them were too above it all to go on the Windies tour first so blase were they. it is noticeable that dravid and Sharma who performed in E did go to WI.

  • Deuce03 on May 30, 2012, 16:48 GMT

    The usual haters have come out to have a whine, I see. Firstly, if you leave the batsmen out of it, since this article is about the bowlers, England have actually been competitive in all conditions in the last few years. The failure in the UAE was down to the batting; the bowling maintained its recent high standards. Even on the last tour of India in 2008 the bowlers hardly disgraced themselves. The figures of these bowlers don't measure up against the Aussies'. Yet. But Broad, Bresnan and Finn could all finish their careers with figures better than Gillespie's if they retain their place and their fitness. Finn and Broad could even challenge McGrath (Broad's average is declining very quickly). And Anderson is one of the top two pace bowlers in the world right now, much as McGrath was for most of his career. Swann isn't as talented as Warne, but he has a similar strike rate (actually slightly better). Saker's comments are optimistic but not totally ridiculous.

  • M.zubair on May 30, 2012, 16:48 GMT

    Mr. Saker has lost his mind .......... how about their latest series against Pakistan ..... 3-0 ...... rings any bells .............

  • HLANGL on May 30, 2012, 16:38 GMT

    @5wombats on (May 30 2012, 08:53 AM GMT): True, Eng managed to beat Aus in 2005, but it was the only hiccup throughout their run. They never faced 2-0, 3-0, 4-0 whitewashes like India, Eng, etc. face today. Just few months back, Eng were humiliated by Pakistan. In SL, they only levelled the series 1-1. Compared to that, the only patch the 2000-2007 Aus side suffered was Ashes 2005. That again was a 2-1. Also their sole win was by some huge margine in contrast to the 2 wins by England which were by very very narrow margins. With all due respect to what England could achieve in Ashes 2005, still it could have been a 3-0 win for Austrailia were they able to finish off the 2 games they eventually lost to England. In contrast, all victories by the 2000-2007 Aus side were far more convincing ones. I'm not taking the sides led by Alan Border or Mark Tayler were the strongest, but 2000-2007 side was a different package with 7-8 genuine greats. True, Aus side after 2007 is only a mere shadow.

  • AbhijeetC on May 30, 2012, 16:28 GMT

    Jimmy Anderson could be in form of his life...but Swann is no way Warne......just look at the Pakistan and Srilanka series and everyone would know how Swann came 2nd best in his own team......Warne would have blasted Pakistan on those pitches....Plus Pakistan is not India.....Pakistan played with relatively unknown batsman.....and swann was helpless against them......come this November, England will play India...whatever the outcome of the series, the one thing will sure going to happen.....'shattered Swann' at the end of the series.... about Jimmy Anderson.....he is going trough form of his life.....it won't last long...after year or two he is going to come down....and Check the numbers for zaheer khan and you will find the similarities for same period...Just that Zaheer do not have support at other end and Indian batsman found wanted recently....I rate Jimmy to the par with zaheer at the moment..

  • JG2704 on May 30, 2012, 16:21 GMT

    @VillageBlacksmith on (May 30 2012, 00:57 AM GMT) To be honest I'm not sure about that. Presuming our 4th paceman would be Finn , I'd say the attacks are fairly even. The averages are roughly the same etc. I think it's difficult to compare. I'd say if we went for a 5 man attack now the 4 pacers would be of similar quality whereas Swann would give 2012 side the edge as he is better than Giles.

  • JG2704 on May 30, 2012, 16:14 GMT

    I do like the way when one person says something we get alot of foreign commenters whp say "The English say..." , like we have all been saying we're as good as the Aussies pre 2008

  • Usama.T.Sheikh on May 30, 2012, 16:14 GMT

    nobody can tell that whether they r as great as glenn&shane but time and history will.........

  • on May 30, 2012, 16:06 GMT

    Saker.....you are a joker! :D :D

  • on May 30, 2012, 15:48 GMT

    Haha Brett Lee and Stuart Broad ? Just ask any batsmen in the world who he would rather face.

  • MrPontingToYou on May 30, 2012, 15:46 GMT

    @ mE wE, i actually would rather have trott in my team than lara or tendulkar. trott has already played more important innings for his country than lara or tendulkar ever did.... and no im not english.

  • mark1983 on May 30, 2012, 15:36 GMT

    saker comparing to aussie bowling attack but they never loss a series washout under thier bowling

  • hersheybar on May 30, 2012, 15:36 GMT

    Hahahahaha! Thanks for the laugh, it's just what I needed after a stressful day at the office :) bless!

  • Big_Poppa_94 on May 30, 2012, 15:30 GMT

    Bangladesh are a much better team than England.

  • milepost on May 30, 2012, 15:28 GMT

    Bwahahahahahah! Absolutely hilarious! These guys will get found out against South Africa who are a top bowling unit and whose batsman value their wickets. Whitewashed after reaching number 1? Warne and McGrath were exceptional and had to bowl to exceptional players for most of their careers. No one in the England bowling line up is even close. They are good players, not great ones.

  • on May 30, 2012, 15:21 GMT

    Even as an ardent English admirer of Anderson, Swann et al. These boys have a long way to go to get near the duo they are compared to. The only area where this current squad have the edge is the depth of backup seam bowling.

  • g.narsimha on May 30, 2012, 14:56 GMT

    5WOMBATS - even after 5 strait loses in asia u r still ON THE ONCE IN A DECADE WINS OVER INDIA In ur own den I thought after nightmares in uae & sl u people might have realised the truth that u can only win in eng or aus, u r not an all weather team , just 2 series loses, we ARE BEING BRANDED as weak team but the same weak team thrashed u r team 5-0 in odis immitiatly after u r great home wins .now u again resurfased after great home wins on wi with the old fimaliar rantings of indias recent loses , i am glad to see u again as u were not to be seen during u r teams great heroics in UAE, SL .N O TEAM from ASIA STILL WON ASERIES IN AUS, SA WE CAME near to winning a series in AUS BUT UMPIRING IN ASYDNEY test cost us WE missed in sa last time THE MAN CALLED KALLIS singlehandadly robbed us of an deserving series win ,

  • on May 30, 2012, 14:19 GMT

  • Empty-Sequence on May 30, 2012, 14:19 GMT

    A couple of more SA's Neil Wagner like might put them right up there??

  • chapathishot on May 30, 2012, 14:15 GMT

    As always when they keep quiet it is better ,One they win against some opposition they start to talk and shortly after they will have to eat all the words.The whole world will really know how good they are at home after SA tour

  • samincolumbia on May 30, 2012, 14:12 GMT

    HAHAHA...England got whitewashed by the weakest Pakistan team in recent history!! Then they win a couple of matches against the minnow WI in their own backyard and now they are great as the aussie and WI teams of the past!!

    Look at England's record in the sub continent for the past 18 YEARS....Funny ridiculing India's performance overseas while their own team is a joke.

    What greater insult than comparing the bowlers to Warne and Mcgrath!!

  • mE_wE on May 30, 2012, 13:51 GMT

    LOL !! very good joke, had a nice morning laugh. What's next? Trot resembles Tendulkar or Lara LOL !!

  • 5wombats on May 30, 2012, 13:49 GMT

    @Perera32 on (May 30 2012, 10:59 AM GMT); "England win a Series at home vs a Weak opponent (india) and people start comparing them to one of the best Test teams ever". We thought india were supposed to be a good team - wasn't that what all the india hype was about? All the big talk? Don't forget india have never in their whole history won a series in either Australia or South Africa and yet their fans were comparing india to the great Australia and West Indies sides of the past... until they arrived in England. After watching them last year - don't make us laugh....

  • on May 30, 2012, 13:47 GMT

    Queue 100 comments about winning in the subcontinent blah blah.

  • on May 30, 2012, 13:45 GMT

    HAhahhahaha...wait let me read it again.....hahahhaha, no still hilarious!

  • Muttee on May 30, 2012, 13:40 GMT

    Saker must be talking about their batting abilities, one has to agree, Anderson and Swann are better batsmen then McGrath and Warne

  • loudmouth on May 30, 2012, 13:33 GMT

    Shouldn't this headline read 'Saker Talks Up His Contract Just Before Renegotiating'? I must say I think that Anderson & Swann would be embarrassed by this. I remember Anderson getting carted all round the ground in the 06/07 Ashes. And is Swann really going to be remembered like Warne? Seriously guys if England really want to talk it up like this they'd better actually win something in the sub continent first. Like Warne & McGrath? Please....

  • Blacknwhite on May 30, 2012, 13:12 GMT

    This bowling attack is the best in business. They are going to flog the Indian team on their own backyard. We all know that this team will remain the best atleast for another couple of decades. They have tremendous skills and hardwork. They prepare every series with full efforts and put the others in shame.

  • gbqdgj on May 30, 2012, 13:06 GMT

    @ facebook user..."so Stuart Broad is compared to Brett Lee......i don't think Brett Lee has been ever whacked back for six sixes in an over" So in tests (which is what we are talking about) Brett Lee took 310 wickets @ 30.81 in 150 innings with a best of 5/30 and Broad has taken 161 @ 30.42 in 86 innings with a best of 7/72...hmmm sounds pretty comparable to me. So what on earth has Broad being smashed all over the place in 1 game of 1 day cricket got to do with their comparison in tests...I may as well start comparing their batting records in tests...I don't think Lee has ever scored a test century therefore Broad must be a better bowler...hope you get the point or are you so parochial you can't accept that Braod and Lee are equally good in tests?

  • on May 30, 2012, 12:49 GMT

    slugger1969 did you just say Anderson has become dangerous at home? i think you need to check the records mate- i think you will find he is dangerous in every condition - just like in Oz - UAE -Sri Lanka- need i say more?

  • glance_to_leg on May 30, 2012, 12:39 GMT

    Bikram Chaudhury ... England's bowling did not struggle against Pakistan; it was England's hopeless batting that lost them the series. England's attack is very balanced, and very good, but does not compare with the best Australian or West Indian or, indeed, Pakistani (Imran, Wasim, Waqar, Quadir) attacks of yore. What is reassuring about England's current crop of bowlers is not just that they are good, but that their understudies (with the exception of the spin department) are also excellent. Nevertheless, it would be nice to see another competent spinner, or a left arm seamer, or even a genuine quick in the mix. Then we would stand a better chance when touring. But I look forward to really testing time against the South Africans.

  • YorkshirePudding on May 30, 2012, 12:28 GMT

    @slugger1969, and had McGrath been run out by the short leg at Old trafford it would have been 3- (eng) 1, if Warne had ripped through Englands second innings at TB it would have been 3-0 (aus), If Warn had taken the catch at off KP at the oval it would have been 4-0 to Aus, ifs and buts, in the end it was one of the best and most evenly matched series I've watched, which was a good thing for cricket as it kept spectators interesed until the last delivery at the oval.

  • Exfactor44 on May 30, 2012, 12:25 GMT

    I think you are ten years too early to start comparing England with the great teams of the past.

  • cricketphile on May 30, 2012, 11:58 GMT

    I'm English and when I first read this I thought it was a load of old nonsense, as England never seem to create the crippling pressure that Warne & McGrath did. Also, the numbers don't compare that well. However, if you look at how England's attack has performed over the last two years - which is the period Saker is referring to - the numbers are very comparable: Andrerson 106 wickets @ 22.9; Swann 103 @ 25.9; Broad 78 @ 24.3; Finn 40 @ 26.6; Bresnan 38 @ 21.9; Tremlett 36 @25.7. For England to have had 6 bowlers all averaging mid or low 20s over two years is phenomenal, and Jimmy and Swann's stats definitely stack up with Warne & McGrath over the recent period. Can they maintain it over a decade though? Unlikely.

  • MrPontingToYou on May 30, 2012, 11:47 GMT

    @ Nunbbel Meer, the SA attack is world class, and steyn will go down for sure as one of the greats, but please don't include tsotsobe on that list.

  • hokum on May 30, 2012, 11:36 GMT

    This is very funny article indeed. This might be useful in next article..

    Andrew Strauss -> George Headley + Allan Border Alastair Cook -> Brian Lara + Sanath Jayasuriya Jonathan Trott -> Don Bradman Kevin Pietersen -> Viv Richards Ian Bell -> Javed Miandad Jonny Bairstow -> Sachin Tendulkar Matt Prior -> Adam Gilchrist Tim Bresnan -> Garry Sobers + Jacques Kallis Stuart Broad -> Imran Khan + Richard Hadlee Graeme Swann -> Shane Warne + Murali James Anderson -> Glenn McGrath + Dennis Lillee Steven Finn -> Malcolm Marshall

  • asithaSL on May 30, 2012, 11:24 GMT

    No doubt England got the current best bowling attack in the world now. But, they didn't prove it in subcontinent yet. Only Swann n Anderson did well. But, Ausses did prove it all over the world. Hope English bowlers ll do the same. WI playing test maches more better than Indian did in England. All the Best WI in next matches...!!

  • on May 30, 2012, 11:23 GMT

    please try to match apple with an apple.....I have seen McGrath and Warne destroyed Pakistan batting twice inside 60 runs in a test match played at UAE, Inzi, Imran Nazir, Muhammad Yousuf, Wasim Akram were in the line up, and no one has forgot yet what treatment these National tigers got against the weakest batting line up of Pakistan last year at UAE.

  • ssaads on May 30, 2012, 11:20 GMT

    I think we are missing out one of the best bowling attack:

    Waseem Akram, Waqar Younus, Shoaib Akhtar and Saqlain Mushtaq.

  • on May 30, 2012, 11:18 GMT

    Watch the England team stutter against SA and then the knives will come out.

    As good as Warne and McGrath? Maybe if they can sustain this level of performance for another 5 or 6 years, then possibly. But right now, it's a touch premature.

  • mann_comp on May 30, 2012, 11:18 GMT

    This is really stupid. You just have to look at the numbers in the box to realise Saker was day dreaming. 257@31 cannot even be spoken in the same breath as 563@21.4. Shane Warne and Swann . I am sure Warnie will be buying drinks for the whole bar to laugh over that absurdity.

  • guptahitesh4u on May 30, 2012, 11:17 GMT

    It won't be suprising if someone says that the English top-order makes me feel as if 4 Bradman are playing in the same 11 Stop this...they have just managed to draw a series against SL, they were whitewashed against Pak. They are no where nearer to that "Great" attack.

  • Syed_imran_abbas on May 30, 2012, 11:12 GMT

    I dont think so.. they are good but like of them.. especially when they are not playing home.

  • PACERONE on May 30, 2012, 11:07 GMT

    Some are quick to give out accolades.the great Australian fast bowlers were bowling against great batsmen.not batsmen who are on the down slope of their careers or batsmen with little experience.Given neutral circumstances the English team is below average.You can see that if they are on the receiving end they get all frustrated and angry.The amount of poor stroke been played proves that you do not have to be a good bowler to get wickets.Good ball beat the bat and bad balls are getting wickets.Batsmen are getting caught on the boundaries from full blooded hits because they do not try and hit the ball on the ground.Sometimes the fielder is the only one it that area and the ball is hit straight to him.Lara.Tendulkar,Border,Waugh Gavaskar..batsmen who prize their wicket would score hundreds of runs against this type of bowling. An old batsman told me at Kensington that he could bat for days even now against some of the bowling he has seen ..spin or pace.

  • disco_bob on May 30, 2012, 11:00 GMT

    Saker is simply trolling for fun. I think we've all been suckered or should that be 'Sakered'.

  • Perera32 on May 30, 2012, 10:59 GMT

    Warne and McGrath would of much better in the UAE and Sri Lanka. England win a Series at home vs a Weak opponent and people start comparing them to one of the best Test teams ever. Don't make me laugh, don't forget England lost 4 of the 5 last Test Matches in the Sub Continent.

  • Spelele on May 30, 2012, 10:58 GMT

    Swann is not even the best spinner in the world at present; never mind comparing him to the great Warne. Look at how he has been made to huff and puff by West Indian rookies in his own backyard. That would never have happened to Warne! As for the Anderson-McGrath comparison, well, the gap of 9 between their averages says it all!

  • cabinet96 on May 30, 2012, 10:56 GMT

    Wow, all these people getting their nickers in a twist over a piece of manipulative journalism. I have read all these 200 comments and hardly anyone has thought to read Saker's comments in context. He was most likely asked, "is this attack as good as the Australia one", where he said, "we should be saying our group is as good as them". If he said they weren't, the journalists would have been saying, "Saker doesn't rate English attack", that would be incredibly bad for team morale, with headlines like that going around. He probably doesn't believe what the headline says, but he said it because he thought the consequences of him saying that would be less than the consequences of him saying no.

  • SteveBooth96 on May 30, 2012, 10:52 GMT

    I think everyone needs to calm down - there's no way Saker really believes this, it's just a way of boosting confidence.

  • Bollo on May 30, 2012, 10:51 GMT

    Disappointed to see Jason Gillespie being given short shrift here - he took about the same number of wickets as Anderson currently has, at a significantly better average, and better SR. He was a wonderful world-class bowler (as is Anderson). Re. the bowling depth, I think people are forgetting players such as MacGill (208 test wickets at 29), Reiffel (104 wickets at 27), Clark (94 wickets at 24), Fleming (75 wickets at 26), Miller (69 wickets at 26), Bichel (58 wickets at 32) and Kasprowicz (113 wickets at 33) - Aus had pretty good depth, and variety, as well.

  • yorkshirematt on May 30, 2012, 10:31 GMT

    'BikramChaudhury No this bowling attack did NOT struggle against pakistan. If you'd actually watched the series you'd have seen that it was the batsmen that struggled and the bowlers bowled very very well on some flat pitches. It was flat for the Pakistani bowlers as well but England were playing for imaginary spin that wasn't there

  • amitgarg78 on May 30, 2012, 10:30 GMT

    Hyperbole anyone? LOL. Can't stop laughing!

  • on May 30, 2012, 10:19 GMT

    No Need to say more when I read this, Two great attacks? England James Anderson: 267 Test wickets at 30.05 Stuart Broad: 161 at 30.42 Tim Bresnan: 52 at 25.46 Graeme Swann: 188 at 28.12

    Australia Glenn McGrath: 563 at 21.64 Brett Lee: 310 at 30.81 Jason Gillespie: 259 at 26.13 Shane Warne: 708 at 25.41

  • neo-galactico on May 30, 2012, 10:09 GMT

    As a Saffer, it's true that the Poms are the best team on the world. Man for man the Proteas trump the Poms (except in the wickedkeeping and spin departments), but the Proteas are notoriously slow-starters and have the tendency to fire and fail together, and thus vastly underachieve (although one may say they have been unlucky at times). As a bowling attack the Poms are better than the the Proteas but they don't have a better pace-attack than ours. The English are rightly the top of the rankings for they win a majority of their matches, whereas we draw more than we have to. They have made their home turf a fortress and indeed go into the SA series as favourites. But then again SA perform better away from home and so it makes for a very intriguing series that will hopefully keep us at the edge of our seats, pity it's only 3 tests though. And the article is just a mind game, no one truly takes it seriously. Shout out to my man RANDYOZ and JONESY.

  • yorkshirematt on May 30, 2012, 10:07 GMT

    For once the comments from England's detractors are fully justified here

  • ultrasnow on May 30, 2012, 10:06 GMT

    Indian fan here. I think if you throw Warnie the ball right now he'd still bowl out the entire England top order - round their legs. Please stop comparing apples with oranges.

  • Ozcricketwriter on May 30, 2012, 10:05 GMT

    Numbers wise, they have worse averages and less wickets than the Australian team. Not to mention that Brett Lee wasn't definitively in the best 4 bowlers and for a significant period of time nor was Jason Gillespie. England's best are as good as Australia's fringe bowlers during the dominant period.

  • VillageBlacksmith on May 30, 2012, 10:02 GMT

    the guy who said this is an australian... swanny or jimmy or straussy or anyone english didn't say it.... geddit now???

  • on May 30, 2012, 10:02 GMT

    There isn't doubt about the greatness of the Eng XI attack. However, if you say that they are good as the 'greats', then I would love to know about the level of the South African's bowling attack! Steyn, Philander, Morne, Tsotsobe is one hell of a group as well.

  • slugger1969 on May 30, 2012, 9:59 GMT

    @5wombats...beaten convincingly in 2005? If the deflection off the glove of Kaprowicz went a shade wider and rolled away for four, then Australia would have won that series. Hardly screams a convincing whipping (or complete annihalation as a previous poster put it). They won the 2 tests that McGrath didn't play. Little perspective here. Also keep in mind that a small matter of 18 months later it was 5 nil. Now THAT is convincing. I never rated Anderson at all years ago but must admit that he has become very dangerous at home. He will be a real test for any batsman, however, to stick him in the McGrath category is just silly talk. As for Swann and Warne? Surely Swann is a fine bowler, no doubt but comparisons to Warne should be limited to the inane ramblings of the insane.

  • goodhoot on May 30, 2012, 9:48 GMT

    Let's see if the entire English attack can rack up around 1200 test wickets,then we can pass judgement

  • on May 30, 2012, 9:45 GMT

    Today Warne n McGrath.Tomorrow Ambrose,Garner,Roberts,Holding?The English better dominate World Cricket for another decade and then talk.

  • csowmi7 on May 30, 2012, 9:44 GMT

    this england side has yet to achieve anything substantial so far except maybe beating a Aussie side hampered by the retirement of some of the greatest cricket players in the history of the game and beating an ageing Indian side on the wrong side of their 30s. The Indian side which they beat were hampered by injuries and had no real bowler who could cause a threat.

  • mukesh_LOVE.cricket on May 30, 2012, 9:42 GMT

    England does have a world class attack , certainly their best ever.. but to compare them with mcgrath/warne is a bit too much ,those guys were in a different league altogether , but i agree that broad/bresnan/finn is as good as or even better than lee who was never that great once he lost his extreme pace

  • on May 30, 2012, 9:38 GMT

    This article is a joke, how can you compare this attack to the of the aussie... not even close. That Australian attack won games overseas, this England attack cannot do that. just now you will want to compare them to the windies of the 70 and 80.

  • on May 30, 2012, 9:26 GMT

    No comparison with the erstwhile Aussie bowling which conquered all opposition both at home and away and dominated world cricket for a decade. England has a loooooooonngggg way to go mate

  • on May 30, 2012, 9:20 GMT

    so Stuart Broad is compared to Brett Lee......i don't think Brett Lee has been ever whacked back for six sixes in an over

  • ThirteenthMan on May 30, 2012, 9:18 GMT

    On each of Strike rate, economy and average, McGrath is slightly ahead of Lillee. So McGrath is up there with the greats.

    He is slightly behind on wickets per match.

    Jimmy Anderson is some way short. He has 267 wickets from 70 tests against Lillee's 355 from the same number. McGrath's average rate would have given him approx. 315 from the same number of matches.

    Andesron's have cost about 30 each, against 22 for McGrath and Lillee.

  • gbqdgj on May 30, 2012, 9:12 GMT

    I reckon we are all in agreement about the headliners i.e. McGrath & Warne outclass Anderson & Swann but if you look at the other bowlers I think Broad is probably comparable to Lee and behind that attack Bresnan, Finn and Tremlett (when fit) have the ability, not yet proven, to be better than the support bowling that that great Aussie side had....BUT, no one can persuade me that the greatest attack as a unit in history was anything other than the Windies attack of the late 70's through to the mid 80's....hostile, accurate, controlled and dominatinjg...can you imagine if they had had a Warne or Murali to back them up...boy oh boy what a nightmare!!!!!

  • Ownsbcci on May 30, 2012, 9:02 GMT

    I can gather 2 things from this article.

    1. Little know David Saker just wanted some limelight and he got it. 2. He is the bowling coach for English team and trying to prove that under his guidance the English attack had improved so much that they are comparable with McGrath and Warne.

    No doubt Anderson is fantastic in his own backyard or the condition which are favourable but no doubt in my mind that he can be compared to McGrath yet!

    Swann is again a good bowler but wouldn't comment any further on the comparison to Warne

  • ste13 on May 30, 2012, 8:55 GMT

    Is it a joke? Anderson has never been a great bowler, he is good, but McGrath was great, averages speak for themselves. Swann is very good, but also not the magician type Warne used to be. Some poeple say Australia does not have good attack now, but I cannot see a big difference between Aus performance in the Carribean this year and England agaisnt the same team AT HOME. Anyway, Indian pitches at the end of 2012 will verify how strong this attack is and I would rather expect Bresnan and Swann to shine rather than Anderson/Broad

  • on May 30, 2012, 8:53 GMT

    wasn't this the same attack which struggled against pakistan in UAE

  • 5wombats on May 30, 2012, 8:53 GMT

    @HLANGL on (May 30 2012, 07:28 AM GMT) "This England side is good, but it's certainly a no match to the Austrailian side in 2000-2007" We don't agree with your dates. The England side of 2005 beat Australia quite convincingly in England. The current England side would stand up to comparision with the 2005 England side, and although it is academic - we feel that this current England side would also beat the 2005 Aussies in England. In any event Saker is talking about the bowlers, not the whole England side. This England side is a good side, not great. It takes years to become great - and it took years for Australia and West Indies to become great.

  • on May 30, 2012, 8:48 GMT

    please dont compare this attack with the australian attack.Mcgreth and shane warne are legends.They performed well in all countries, but the now england bowling lacks that,they cannot perform the same way in other countries as they perform in england.

  • Herbet on May 30, 2012, 8:43 GMT

    Ha ha, this was bound to get loads of comments. Lets not get carried away here, Saker is doing his job and building the confidence of his bowlers. Anderson and Swann are excellent bowlers, you could say great in terms of the history of English bowling. But they are not in the same league as McGrath and Warne, who are two of the very greatest bowlers of all time. They were, in my opinion, the sole reason of Australia's dominance, allowing their fairly limited batsmen - Hayden, Langer, Martyn - the chance to rack up huge scores with no pressure on as the opposition could not set attacking fields, having already been skittled by McGrath and Warne and having to try and contain instead. The other bowlers, Gillespie et al, can put a portion of their success down to batsmen relaxing after getting away from them two.

  • bouncedout on May 30, 2012, 8:42 GMT

    @jonesy2

    You are a very bitter man. The English attack is so far ahead of the current Aus lineup that it's laughable.

    England have destroyed Aus in recent years and will do so again during the next ashes tour (but then you already knew that didn't you).

    Remind me again, who is the best test team in the world

  • RandyOZ on May 30, 2012, 8:41 GMT

    What a completely embarassing comparison! No wonder he got a gig for England - he has no idea! Looks like the sensationalist press has rubbed off on him too!

  • Vii_Vil_Vin on May 30, 2012, 8:41 GMT

    Thats a joke!! Not even a year since you got the number of test ranking and you claim to be better than the mighty Aussies.. They did for more than a decade.. You Brits need to grow up, stop talking up about yourself, do the work on the field consistently for a few years on all conditions against best opposition. Then the world will talk, you don't have to!!

  • on May 30, 2012, 8:37 GMT

    Aus attack's biggest test came in India where they were average before 2004 when they made SPECIAL PLANS to win the final frontier. They were aided by SRT's absence quite a bit in that 2004 win. It will be interesting what type of pitches India have in the forthcoming series, if they are usual non-turners then Saker will have to take his words back. India will be in a rebuilding phase, slightly better than 2001 when India were ranked just ahead of England at 7 or 8.

  • jb633 on May 30, 2012, 8:31 GMT

    Even as an English fan I will hold my hand up and say this article is just wrong. Greame Swann compared to Warne, please get a grip. Swann is good against left handers but medicore at best against right handers. Warne was just a magician and noone in world cricket comes close to him at the moment. The big two tests of the attack are yet to come. We need to wait to see how they fair against SA and India (away) before praising them this highly.

  • on May 30, 2012, 8:23 GMT

    What a laugh, seriously. Marlon Samuels owns Swann at the moment, it should be the other way around, you know, like Warne owning Cullinan, or McGrath owning Lara, for this article to have any substance. The only time they truly couldn't get on top was against India, in India, with Tendulkar, Dravid and Laxman at their peak. Not quite the same as Misbah and errr, who were the others? Not to forget the long list of others like Clark, Reiffel, MacGill, May, Fleming, Funky Miller etc who could always get the job done at the other end. Clark, Gillespie, Fleming and Macgill were in fact very good test bowlers, so let's not get too carried away with the strength in depth thing either, as the likes of Finn, Tremlett, Onions and Dernbach are yet to play too much, or any test cricket at all..

  • S.Jagernath on May 30, 2012, 8:20 GMT

    Even though I am a big fan of the English bowling attack,a comment like this is not a sensible one.None of these bowlers can compare with Glen McGrath.McGrath competes with Malcolm Marshall for the title of the greatest fast bowler of all time.Brett Lee's ability to be devastating & an all out wicket taker cannot be matched by either of the English.Shane Warne has more or less won his spot as the best spin bowler ever,or at least as good as Jim Laker & Bill O' Reilly.The English batsmen are good batsmen but also have a lot to do to be compared to the great English batsmen.

  • yquestion on May 30, 2012, 8:16 GMT

    Aussie living in the UK, I've watched the 1st and 2nd Tests intently. I admire the current English pace and spin bowling attack I would have to agree with 100's of responses so far. I question whether the current English attack is even as good as the Australian attack "on their day". Take a look at how Hilfenhaus, Siddle, Harris and co *destroyed* the Indian team earlier this year. Throw in a world class SA pace attack and I really don't even think England even have the number 1 bowling attack at the moment let alone comparable to former greats over many decades! I really feel sorry for the way the English media and senior figures in the ECB talk up England's chances (Much like they do in Football when every Euro Football and WC Football tournament claims that "England have a great chance to win!"). Bag their players when they perform poorly, talk them up too much when they are in form, results in alot of expectation that can't be lived up to much like so many hypes before this.

  • Sourav1101 on May 30, 2012, 8:05 GMT

    England James Anderson: 267 Test wickets at 30.05

    Stuart Broad: 161 at 30.42

    Tim Bresnan: 52 at 25.46

    Graeme Swann: 188 at 28.12

    Australia Glenn McGrath: 563 at 21.64

    Brett Lee: 310 at 30.81

    Jason Gillespie: 259 at 26.13

    Shane Warne: 708 at 25.41 I think the emotional Saker is overwhelmed of recent success.The record says all. Each of these English fast bowler is not as great as Lee or Gillespi.Forget the comparison to Mcgrath. Saker,come on man, you are comparing Swan to Warne,one of the greatest cricketer the cricket world has ever seen.He has to compete to Saeed Ajmal to be best Spinner in world.

  • dariuscorny on May 30, 2012, 8:02 GMT

    they have an "ENFORCER" who forced Yuvraj to hit six sixes

  • Pat.Virtue on May 30, 2012, 7:52 GMT

    I'm sorry, but this comparison is just ridiculous! Sure, this English attack is a great one in great form, with Anderson, Swann, Bres and Broad all going very well at the moment, albeit against weak opposition. But statistically alone, the dominant Australian attack was just tremendously superior. Comparing Swann to Warne and Ando to McGrath is nonsense- McGrath and Warne could trouble any batsman on any day in any conditions, whilst this current English attack is battling to do it on thier own turf. Then take a look at the replacements- I doubt Bres, Finn, Tremlett, Monty etc. will be anywhere near the calibre of Gillespie, Macgill, Bichel etc.- they are light years apart. Sure this attack is good, but like numerous others, I am pretty sure that it is't even the best in the world at the moment- Surely South Africa's performs better against anyone at the moment. Saker- head your head in shame!

  • PGSGimson on May 30, 2012, 7:52 GMT

    It would be nice if people actually read the article before commenting.

    Saker is saying that, at times Anderson and Swann have bowled as well as Warne and McGrath did. He is not suggesting that they are as good as those two greats.

    I'd also like to remind people that the statistics for Broad and Anderson are misleading. Both started playing test cricket when they were 20 - 3 years before McGrath. This meant they had less time to improve their game before entering test cricket. As a result, their averages are inflated. If you look at their averages from the age of 23 onwards, their stats are considerably better.

    They will never be as good as McGrath but they are better than people think and will prove to be a handful in the summer for SA, especially in English conditions.

    And as for the person who said that the SL and NZ attacks are better than Eng's, thats as ridiculous as saying that this England attack is as good as the old Australian attack

  • Front-Foot-Lunge on May 30, 2012, 7:51 GMT

    Spoken by a man who knows what he's talking about. So we have an Australian cricket coach saying how not only is England's attack unquestionably the BEST IN THE WORLD, Anderson and Broad have the potency of Mcgrath and Warne. How do the likes of randyOz and jonesy answer this one?

  • kasyapm on May 30, 2012, 7:44 GMT

    This is a complete attack and an exciting one along with SA's. Anderson, in particular, has done well in the recent series in subcontinent as well. With a series against India coming up, I hope our bowlers can restrict their batsmen (as happened in Dubai & SL), because I know their bowling is going to give us a tough time.

  • YorkshirePudding on May 30, 2012, 7:34 GMT

    @David_Bofinger, I'd put Larwood, Lindwall, Thompson, Lillee, Trueman, Statham, Garner, Walsh, Marshal, and Holding way out in front of McGrath, especially if you extrapolate the wickets taken over the length of McGraths Career.

  • HLANGL on May 30, 2012, 7:28 GMT

    This England side is good, but it's certainly a no match to the Austrailian side in 2000-2007, or the West Indian side in 1975-1995. The mentioned Austrailian & West Indian sides were far more dominant teams who pulled off convincing victories on a regular basis under all conditions, they won games hands down far more often than not. None of today's sides including England, SA, India & Austrailia would match their dominance, the fact is that these few teams are more or less the same, none of them would be that dominant to be called an invincible force, each can end up being the winner on their day. So the truth is that there's not a single superlative force in world cricket today to be compared with great Austrailian & West Indian sides. By the same token, when it comes to players, only a handful would have any flair close to Viv Richards, Grineedge, Gilchrist, Ponting (in his youth!), Ambrose, Walsh, Marshal, Warne, Lee (in his youth) etc. despite how heavily today's players are paid.

  • veerakannadiga on May 30, 2012, 7:27 GMT

    the best bowling unit right now. ( in fact the best test team ). wish you could export a couple of them tall fast bowlers to our Indian team.

  • HLANGL on May 30, 2012, 7:26 GMT

    This England side is good, but it's certainly a no match to the Austrailian side in 2000-2007, or the West Indian side in 1975-1995. The mentioned Austrailian & West Indian sides were far more dominant teams who pulled off convincing victories on a regular basis under all conditions, they won games hands down far more often than not. None of today's sides including England, SA, India & Austrailia would match their dominance, the fact is that these few teams are more or less the same, none of them would be that dominant to be called an invincible force, each can end up being the winner on their day. So the truth is that there's not a single superlative force in world cricket today to be compared with great Austrailian & West Indian sides. By the same token, when it comes to players, only a handful would have any flair close to Viv Richards, Grineedge, Gilchrist, Ponting (in his youth!), Ambrose, Walsh, Marshal, Warne, Lee (in his youth) etc. despite how heavily today's players are paid.

  • on May 30, 2012, 7:22 GMT

    I really think that poeple have collective blindness when reading some of these articles....The author is talking about the bowling attack, not the team in general...England lost the winter series against Pakistan because of very poor batting...It was exceptional bowling that kept them competing!!!.....As usual, a lot of England bashing in this board, and frankly it's getting boring.......England have comfortably the best all round bowling attack in world cricket...The SA attack lacks variety and whilst Philander has had a great start to his career, it's more down to the dreadful batting techniques of opposition batting as opposed to out-of-this world bowling....put it this way, Anderson, Broad, Finn, Bresnan, Swann & co will cause the SA more problems than vice-versa..Saker is wrong though, as good as this attack is, it can't be compared with the great Aussie attack of the 90's & early 00's.....at least, not yet

  • disco_bob on May 30, 2012, 7:17 GMT

    I think that we must give credit where credit is due. There is no doubt in my mind and I fail to see how anyone could disagree that the current England bowling attack is without doubt the finest, sharpest most dangerous and fearsome bowling attack that England has ever produced during the last two maybe three years.

    However comparison with Mcgrath and Warne? don't make me larf.

  • on May 30, 2012, 7:16 GMT

    Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne were 2 best bollers ever,no 1 can beat them.

  • on May 30, 2012, 7:15 GMT

    Look at the Statistics for the first two Tests. In Top four batsmen, 3 batsmen are from West Indies. What does it suggest? It is that other West Indian batsmen are not performing. It doesnt mean England bowlers are too good.

  • Percy_Fender on May 30, 2012, 7:14 GMT

    I do not think any bowling attack can ever be compared with the the West Indians of the 80s or with Magrath and Warne. Saker is being subjective because he is the bowling coach. There is no doubt that the current English attack is good. But they need English conditions or poor or unprepared batsmen to succeed noticeably.

  • on May 30, 2012, 7:12 GMT

    I think drawing such a conclusion means living in fool's paradise. At the moment, West Indian side is depleted by Gayle and Narine. When these players will come back, present eleven will look like very different. Even present West Indian bowlers will look much better than English bowlers when somebody like Narine will pick up a wicket in between and will give a break to West Indian fast bowlers. It will be a big booster for West Indian bowlers then. Saying 'Swan is like a Warne' means really dont know what Saker wants to tell. I dont know whether Swan will be there in playing eleven once a little better spinner comes to playing eleven whereas Warne rules the world despite of having presence of MacGill who took 200+ wickets in 47 Tests for Australia during the same period. I am not saying present English bowlers are'bad' but they are good because other counter part bowlers are not as good because that side is depleted.

  • anotherlostleader on May 30, 2012, 7:11 GMT

    What a total load of rubbish! The England attack is good but not in the same league as the Australian one. Give those bowlers a few more years and the gap will be even bigger. The England attack is not even as good as the 2005 one. I do find it tiresome when people get over excited about England under Strauss. Yes they are good but test cricket has slumped so much in recent years that their achievements have to be taken with a pinch of salt. The only real test they have had recently was Pakistan and they were stuffed! Swann is good but not in the same league as Warne or even Ajmal in current form. Anderson has had a good last few years but he will never be McGrath and honestly he needs to do it for a bit longer yet before one can even compare him to the greats. Articles like this do annoy me!!

  • PPL11 on May 30, 2012, 6:58 GMT

    ENGLAND ARE NO 1 IN THEIR OWN BACKYARD, THEY PROVED THIS PLAYING PAKISTAND IN UAE AND SRILANKA IN SRILANKA, AND I AM 110% SURE THEY WILL PROVE AGAIN WHEN THEY TOUR INDIA, SA, and AUS... LOL

  • Snick_To_Backward_Point on May 30, 2012, 6:57 GMT

    Saker is purely comparing attacks and how both are / were masters at piling on the pressure. Statistics are absolutely pointless in this context. Both Broad and Anderson were erratic and went for plenty early in their careers. If you take their averages in the past 2 years they're actually better than Warne & Mcgraths. In flat track, unhelpful conditions the English attack have bowled out sides cheaply. The fact the BATSMEN have all too often let the bowlers down so the Eng attack's efforts have gone begging is a completely different argument. Saker isnt comparing the SIDES, he;s comparing the relative merits of the ATTACKS. All the arm chair pundits on here (including me) aren;t even close to SAker's inside knowledge, I'd say he was better qualified to have the opinion....

  • jmcilhinney on May 30, 2012, 6:56 GMT

    Let's not forget that this is the same David Saker who made the comment about Broad being the "enforcer" for the team last year that apparently led to poor enough performances from Broad that there was talk of his being dropped for the India series. Since Broad got that notion out his head and started pitching the ball up he has been devastating. Saker is obviously doing some good things with the England attack but, at the very least, Andy Flower should place an outright ban on his talking to the media. These statements don't really do anyone any favours. Saker does say "at times" but even so...

  • dsig3 on May 30, 2012, 6:50 GMT

    @Sir_Freddie_Flintoff cant argue with your erudite, objective analysis. You and Mark Nicholas must be visionaries. The rest of the world has not caught up yet. The brand of logic being used in some of these Aus comparisons is far beyond the common rational human being. Even most of the England supporters are gagging at some of the articles and comments coming out of England, well most......... except you.

  • Meety on May 30, 2012, 6:47 GMT

    @Charlie Budge "...We should be saying our group is as good as them..." first sentence of the 3rd paragraph. "Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne in tandem were amazing, but I have seen some spells from Jimmy Anderson and Graeme Swann that have been just as good or better at times" Further down on the 3rd paragraph. It ain't just the headline & nowhere did Saker mention "structure", although there was mention of depth. "The comparison made with Andy1102 is laughable when you look at the number of matches played by Anderson and Swann, which is a fraction of those played by Warne and McGrath." - you are 100% right, but THAT is the point of most of the comments on this article. The England attack mentioned here, have NOT played in enough countries OFTEN enough to make any comparisons creditable!

  • PPL11 on May 30, 2012, 6:47 GMT

    The Article title is "Saker rates attack as good as great Australians" Well i think any team coach who are doing well in home conditions only and not anywhere else will think their attack is best. Let him think who cares?

  • din7 on May 30, 2012, 6:44 GMT

    I wouldn't say eng attack is as good as australians but yes they are the best in the world right now with sa missing a good spinner. And for some of my poor indian collegues, eng will bowl well india as they did in pak & sri. no doubt abt that.

  • on May 30, 2012, 6:38 GMT

    I'm sorry, but even as a massive England fan, this is just completely wrong.

  • on May 30, 2012, 6:11 GMT

    let them come to INDIA where their bowling have to handle the toughest condition ever and if they do well,than we can say that they are a good bunch of attack as Australia had done well in 2004 touring INDIA.

  • rats_rule on May 30, 2012, 6:11 GMT

    @Cropper03, Gillespie in his prime (early 2000s) was a better bowler than any current English bowler. Lots of people are of the opinion that he would even have trumped McGrath at that stage. Hope your not just looking at his tour of 2005, where his body just failed him, and drawing conclusion from that

  • pranab708 on May 30, 2012, 5:58 GMT

    The table comparing the stats of the two sets of bowlers, makes the difference. The Aussie quartet was definitely better than this english lot. Still this one's damn good one. One of the best in the history of the game. In my opinion though, if we talk about only the pace bowling attack, SA's attack is just a little bit better. Bresnan's every inch worth of his place in the team (especially given his batting ability), but still Finn provides another dimension to the attack. He should be preferred over Bresnan.

  • Lara213 on May 30, 2012, 5:49 GMT

    @teo I'm quite sure Warne and McGrath never lost to Pakistan in a series??

    Yes they lost a series in 1994-95: http://static.espncricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/1994-95/AUS_IN_PAK/

    Although only 1-0 and by 1 wicket in a series they could have won 3-0.

  • CricketFanInLosAngles on May 30, 2012, 5:26 GMT

    Saker, it is the opposition (coaches and captains) who should rate. Rating one's own team is always biased. So, I don't think there is any opposition coach or captain or senior who would rate England's bowling as one of the best. Quite the contrary. They are good only in their back yard (as all teams are, these days). Also, England team has been helped by bad teams or out of teams (India, West Indies ...).

  • jonesy2 on May 30, 2012, 5:19 GMT

    saker is obviously just joking and i for one find it very funny indeed especially when england have the 4th or 5th best bowling lineup behind aus, SA, pak and NZ.

  • tinysteelorchestra on May 30, 2012, 5:17 GMT

    I am a dyed-in-the-wool Englishman and I thought this was one of the funniest things I've ever read. Credit where it's due, I think the current attack is a good one. But comparisons are ridiculous. The current England team has only one away series victory, against a transitional Australian side. They were slaughtered by Pakistan, lost to the West Indies and obtained a pretty streaky drawn series against the South Africans having been nine-down at the end of two Tests. Yes, they have won every home series so far, a run that I believe will be sorely tested later this summer, but when that includes two against WI, one against Bangladesh, a weak Pakistan and a weak India, it doesn't sound quite so impressive. Having grown up during the humiliations of the 80s and 90s, I am enjoying this while it lasts! But to compare with Australia... laughable!

  • David_Bofinger on May 30, 2012, 5:16 GMT

    "Glenn McGrath and Shane Warne in tandem were amazing, but I have seen some spells from Jimmy Anderson and Graeme Swann that have been just as good or better at times." It's a lot easier to be good "at times". What McGrath in particular had was an amazing consistency that niggled away at batsmen until they got themselves out. If the English bowlers are just bowling very well *sometimes* then they're not much like McGrath, who is a serious contender for the "greatest man ever to get a shiny red patch on his bum" award.

  • on May 30, 2012, 4:25 GMT

    I guess the writer wrote too soon, should have waited for the South African series...as their attack is as good as anyone in the world (Steyn who is best in the world, Morkel, Philender)...would be easy to compare the attack when they are against each other...I still not consider this English attack the best..

  • on May 30, 2012, 3:48 GMT

    @abu yousuf: ur statement was wrong,swan is a talent guy,he will some warne or more,dont imitiate players

  • valvolux on May 30, 2012, 3:33 GMT

    A bowling coach rating his men as good as one of the best attacks ever. Must be the coaching? I don't think there's any argument that the English attack is pretty good - but is it even the best in world cricket at the moment? I think the south Africans and even the current Australian tack are right up there, if not better than them. Comparing them to the great Australia attack is just stupid. Anderson is awesome in the right conditions and swan can be dangerous on day 5 - but they don't hold a candle to even the second string bowling attack the aussies had (Gillespie and macgill). Broad would've been lucky to get a game at shield level back during that era such was the stocks Australia had. Broad wouldn't even make the current Australian team, nor the team that lost the last ashes. McGrath and warne were dangerous no matter what day, no matter what the conditions - all they needed was the cover to be off the pitch. They had to chuck Bresnan into that list to get a decent record

  • Shan156 on May 30, 2012, 3:31 GMT

    England fan here and would like to say this is a totally meaningless comparison. McGrath and Warne are way superior to Jimmy and Swanny. But, that doesn't mean the English pair are poor. They are very good bowlers, in fact but McGrath and Warne, they are not. However, both are constantly improving and if they continue at this rate, it would be great for England.

  • on May 30, 2012, 3:17 GMT

    Continued Post.

    Broad Avg 20.46 with 13 wickets. Panesar Avg 21.57 with 14 wickets.

    Swann Avg 25.07 with 13 wickets. Anderson Avg 27.66 with 9 wickets.

    This is Englands bowling in the UAE.

    There batting on the other hand was terrible.

    Prior Avg 37.50 with 150 runs. Trott Avg 26.83 with 161 runs.

    Cook Avg 26.50 with 159 runs. Strauss Avg 25.00 with 150 runs.

    Morgan Avg 13.66 with 82 runs. Pietersen Avg 11.66 with 67 runs.

    Bell Avg 8.50 with 51 runs.

    This show that England need both Batting and Bowling to click to do well.

    While South Africa can do well with only one doing well.

    Also England's struggle in Asia is because of their Batting Avg of 27 in the last 5-7 years in Tests.

    Their bowling has been good at an Avg of 35 in Tests.

    The reason South Africa draw so much in Asia is because their Batting Avg of 42 in the last 5-7 years in Tests.

    Their bowling Avg of 40 in Tests.

  • JustOUT on May 30, 2012, 2:53 GMT

    oh my goodness.. Dont compare Anderson with Steyn. Steyn is no.1 bowler for last 3 years and nobody has even reach near to his ranking in last year or so. Anderson is in good form, but comparing him with Steyn make non sense. It is something like comparing Cook with Sachin, since cook is in good form.

  • nzcricket174 on May 30, 2012, 2:34 GMT

    2005 Ashes was twice as good as the current one. We have already seen when a few good batsmen come together England are clueless! It was only two years ago Tamim Iqbal smashed this same attack all around the park. Australia would have never let Sammy get his ton, England couldn't even contain him. Sammy was only out of his own accord.

  • on May 30, 2012, 2:33 GMT

    Take it easy on me I am new here.

    South Africa played in the UAE in 2010.

    Well you could say that it was only a two match Test Series.

    Harris avg 32.85 with 7 wickets. M. Morkel Avg 37.16 with 6 wickets.

    Steyn Avg 46.33 with 6 wickets. Botha Avg 48.83 with 6 wickets.

    Kallis Avg 116.00. This is what the South Africa bowlers Avg with the ball in UAE.

    The only reason they drew the series was because they batted well.

    AB De Villiers Avg 154.00 with 308 runs. Kallis Avg 107.66 with 323 runs.

    Amla Avg 88.00 with with 264 runs. Smith Avg 48.00 with 144 runs.

    Prince Avg 40.00 with 80 runs. Petersen Avg 32.50 with 130 runs.

    Boucher Avg 23.00 with 69 runs.

    So the reason they were able to draw is because they have a strong batting line up

  • rahulcricket007 on May 30, 2012, 1:48 GMT

    @cropper 03 . even india were able to drew series in sl & sa & defeat every team at home (except sa against whom eng lose at home ) , also won series in england & nz in 2007 & 09 , won in wi in 2006 & 2011 where you were bowled out for 51 .but we never say that we are as good as mighty aussies because we knew that we are not good like them , we have weakness in bowling & batting line up is ageing .

  • on May 30, 2012, 1:45 GMT

    By the looks of things most of you haven't bothered to read the article, and instead have decided to comment on a provocative headline. Saker never actually flat-out claimed the English attack was as good as the Australian attack of old, more that it was similar in terms of its structure and the way they approach bowling. The comparison made with Andy1102 is laughable when you look at the number of matches played by Anderson and Swann, which is a fraction of those played by Warne and McGrath.

    With regards to the comments about England only succeeding at home, this article was about their bowling, which was outstanding all winter despite the English batsmen. In six innings, Pakistan posted three sub-260 totals, including being bowled out for 99 in the third test, and with the exception of Azhar Ali no Pakistani batsman averaged above 38. They were hardly "made to cry on the subcontinent" as one posted put it. Still, why let that get in the way of some good crowing?

  • rahulcricket007 on May 30, 2012, 1:38 GMT

    LOOKING AT THE HYPE WHICH ENGLISH MEDIA & COACHING STAFF CREATE ABOUT SWANN , I THINK IF SAEED AJMAL WAS PLAYING FOR ENGLAND THEN THEY WOULD HAVE DECLARED HIM AS THE BEST SPINNER OF ALL TIME IN TEST CRICKET .

  • VillageBlacksmith on May 30, 2012, 0:57 GMT

    I agree, the 2005 attack of an all fit Hoggard, Harmison, S Jones and Flintoff is/was better than the current Eng crop Saker is referring to.. All Saker is doing is publicly supporting his charges like SAF does and blowing his own trumpet... but this is missing the point, this is quite obviously just an amusing wind-up by Saker, and (judging by the humourless over-reaction and snowstorm of stats) quite a good one at that.

  • rahulcricket007 on May 30, 2012, 0:51 GMT

    just to remind all of you that steyn has a bowling average of 22 which is comparable to mcgrath 's 21.64 but steyn or any other sa coaching staff never said that he is as good as mcgrath . this shows the greatness & humbleness of steyn . comparing anderson who has an average of 30 with mcgrath is a joke to me .

  • PavanM on May 30, 2012, 0:44 GMT

    It is shame to compare swann&co with Warne and McGrath. Swann still need to need to be tested in sub contents. After visiting INDIA last time for ODI serais, he almost decided to quit ODI's. He is afraid of short formats like 20-20 and IPL's. Warne is still dangerous on any pitch including sub contents. McGrath is same like warne ,he was dangerous on any pitch. English bowlers are only effective on England, Aus, NZ pitches.

  • rahulcricket007 on May 30, 2012, 0:38 GMT

    i knew it was coming . now they will say that strauss is better captain then steve waugh or clive lyod , broad is better bowler than marshall , lilee . cook is better than gordon greenidge & gavaskar . kp is greater than lara & sachin .

  • jmcilhinney on May 30, 2012, 0:37 GMT

    I'm not going to read all the comments on this story because it would be pointless but I will say that, as an England fan, I don;t agree with Saker's assessment. I do believe that this England attack is better than a lot of non-England supporters are willing to give it credit for but it's not as good as that Australian attack. Anderson and Broad are both bowling far better at the moment than their career figures, so to judge them on those career figures alone is unfair. That said, I don't see either being as successful as McGrath was in his heyday. He was fast enough and just so incredibly accurate. Lee wasn't that great a bowler in my opinion and it was his pace that was his major asset, but it was an asset. I'm actually surprised at how good Gillespie's figures are but they speak for themselves. Swann is a very good bowler and easily the best orthodox spinner around now but it will be a while before any spinner is as good as Warne was. Maybe they never will.

  • 2.14istherunrate on May 30, 2012, 0:36 GMT

    Anderson is not a fast bowler per se but a swing bowler. As such I would be interested to know of other swing bowlers who can bowl round corners.Swann is a very orthodox off spinner with a completely pure action.. Swann will stand compare with Jim Laker as fine an offie who has ever lived.Both these guys may not have enterd the halls of greatness YET, but look again down the line, please. Broad is starting to collect wickets very nicely, and can be very accurate. he passed Flintoff in terms of 5 wkt hauls a while back. Bresnan is an interesting bowler to say the least and may well prove a thorn in many batsmen's eyes particularly on flat wickets,as he has a few strings to his bow bowling wise. in reserve we have Tremlett who really is a bit like Ambrose/ Mc grath- accurate tall and quick,Onions a highly talented fast medium accurate swing bowler who seems it, and the upcoming Finn- quick and accurate and rapidly improving. Hardly rubbish.Behind these? Meaker,Woakes, Dernbach.

  • Meety on May 30, 2012, 0:23 GMT

    In reference to the table attached, IMO - whilst I rate Bresnan, the fact is he has "only" taken 52 wickets in test cricket & his FC ave is over 30. This would suggest to me his ave (atm) is artificially low in Test cricket. Swann's FC is similar in that his FC ave is also above 30. Brett Lee had an ave of 30, however, his role was as a strike bowler/enforcer. All of the Ozzy bowlers listed had 10+yr careers at TEST level, Anderson is the only English bowler listed who comes near that. == == == @jg2704 - this is not the only article that has tried to compare England to other great sides of the past. It really leads to a lack of respect for what England has achieved over the last 3 or 4 years, this is only 6 mths after being humbled in the UAE & a par performance in SL. I know there is a batting v bowling arguement, but this IMO really is jumping the gun. England's bowling unit need another 2 yrs worth of quality performances all around the world, before it can be realistically compared

  • on May 30, 2012, 0:21 GMT

    I think that @slugger1969 has it right - Saker's having a lend. And @Andy1102 has done the stats for us. Anyone who even remotely suggests (being serious - and I believe that leaves Saker out) that Anderson and Swann are anywhere near as good as Pigeon and Warnie were knows absolutely nothing about test cricket.

  • on May 29, 2012, 23:59 GMT

    I really do not think that this english bowling attack is as good great Australian side. The are good when they are playing in England /some where with assistance for the seam bowlers. If you are that good then why your attack looked very ordinary in UAE while to played pakistan. I think this attack is only good in good conditions not at tough conditions like INDIA.

  • on May 29, 2012, 23:45 GMT

    I hope SA bring them back down to earth!!!

  • Cropper03 on May 29, 2012, 23:43 GMT

    As usual a few people from Asia way adding very little to this article - it's not particularly intelligent to literally keep repeating that England can't win away from home, especially when it's not even true. England's real progression has been in the last 3 years, and so including games from before then is pointless.

    As mentioned before, England losing in the UAE (where they had never played Tests before, which conveniently gets forgotten), had nothing to do with their bowling attack, which was extremely dangerous as always.

    They have also drawn in SA and Sri Lanka and beaten Aus and Bangladesh away, as well as destroying everyone in England (India, Aus, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, WI and Pakistan) in 3 years, and are still improving.

    That is a good team, home and away.

    However, the bowling attack is not as good as Aus, as Warne and McGrath were great bowlers, supported by decent ones. Eng attack is a team of bowlers better than Lee/Gillespie, worse than Warne and McGrath

  • Bilbo on May 29, 2012, 23:43 GMT

    Yeah, even most of the Englishmen on this site agree this is a stretch, at best. The biggest difference is Swann vs Warne. Swann is a fine bowler, even if finger spin is way easier than wrist spin. I did an interesting analysis using their respective test stats, and if one extrapolates Swann's current record after 43 tests to Warne's 145, here is how his figures look (Tests/Inn/Balls/Runs/Average/SR/4s/5s/10s):

    Tests 145 270 36523 18053 642 2.96 56.9 34 44 7

    The wickets are 10% fewer, the average and the SR are pretty similar, as are the 5-fors. Where Warne really goes ahead is in the 4-for's and the 10-for's. Then there is the intimidation factor . . . .

  • Puffin on May 29, 2012, 23:42 GMT

    Someone seems to be ignoring what was witnessed over the last 2 decades. At no point until their fall did the Aussies ever have to worry about losing top spot. I don't remember them being whitewashed. You don't get to that position without having a great bowling attack, one of the standouts in history.

    England are (mostly) excellent in the current context. Beyond that the comparisons are wobbly. We need a coach who is always asking for more, rather than one who thinks he has done all that needs doing. Worrisome, that attitude is.

  • on May 29, 2012, 23:39 GMT

    I was having a bad day till I read this article. Made me burst in laughter. I'm a pakistan fan but 1stly I'm a cricket follower. Warne is a LEGEND the likes of whom we will never see again.

  • redneck on May 29, 2012, 23:36 GMT

    why stop there, i mean strauss is clearly matty hayden and kp well he might aswell be bradman!!!! oh please! sakers aussie by birth but that english cold weather clearly has cause mental problems! the poms wouldnt know greatness if it bit them on the backside!

  • rett on May 29, 2012, 23:33 GMT

    He we go again. The 1989 Australian team were called the 'worst ever' on arrival. The 2006 England team were going to back up the 2005 victory. I used to blame the UK media, but this story uses direct quotes. England have a very good bowling attack but I don't think this will prove to be helpful.

  • dsig3 on May 29, 2012, 23:25 GMT

    I would rate Englands attack of 2005 as better than the current batch of England trundlers. That attack we faced in 2005 was the best I had ever seen but they only lasted 5 test matches.

  • Andy1102 on May 29, 2012, 23:15 GMT

    @Adrian Dominy,@Riingo you want to talk stats, ok. Aus in SL: Warne 37@21.45 (8 matches), McGrath 6@35.66 (3 matches). Eng in SL: Swann 16@22.18 (2 matches), Anderson 11@40.72 (4 matches). Aus in Pak: Warne 45@18.8 (6 matches), McGrath 33@22.45 (8 matches). Eng in Pak: Swann 13@25.07 (3 matches), Anderson 9@27.66 (3 matches). Aus in Ind: Warne 34@43.11 (9 matches), McGrath 33@21.30 (8 matches). Eng in Ind: Swann 8@39.50(2 matches), Anderson 10@29.30(3 matches). And just for good measure, Aus in Eng: Warne 129@21.94 (22 matches), McGrath 87@19.34 (14 matches) Aus in Eng: Swann 14@40.50 (5 matches), Anderson 12@45.16 (5 matches). Eng in Aus: Warne 66@25.81 (14 matches), McGrath 70@22.90 (16 matches) Eng in Aus: Swann 15@39.80 (5 matches) Anderson 29@35.79 (8 matches). Anderson and Swann couldn't even compete in a thousand parallel universes, I am laughing it up.

  • MrPontingToYou on May 29, 2012, 22:37 GMT

    lol, saker's a bit excited there... england's attack is very good.. world class, i'm a fan of their bowlers, but they have a long way to go to compare themselves to the great oz attack... and somehow i don't think they will ever get there.

  • johnathonjosephs on May 29, 2012, 22:31 GMT

    I'm sorry, but Anderson/Broad and Swann are good, yes. But forget about comparing to Warne/McGrath, I doubt they are better than the Steyn/Philander/Morkel and Tahir combination. As of quality, the South Africa pacers are definitely better. As for spin, well Swann has proved himself, put to compare him to somebody of Warne/Murali's caliber is going way too far. More of a Harbhajan or a Herath

  • on May 29, 2012, 22:31 GMT

    Pretty ridiculous comments - comparing Warne to Swann? If Swann ends his career half as succesful as Warne, that would be an achievement. And Anderson to McGrath? Really? Anderson does not have nearly the same control of the ball or his emotions. Not even sure you would rate this Eng attack as the best in the world currently, nevermind the Aussie team of 2000 odd. Think Steyn is a better bowler than Anderson.

  • gunnerr4life on May 29, 2012, 22:23 GMT

    up until now we used to compare saeed ajmal and swann but sakers thinks he's as good as warne ? So should we conclude that saeed ajmal is better than the legendary shane warne ? England has an amazing bowling attack but this article is a complete joke !

  • on May 29, 2012, 22:22 GMT

    No, Mr. Saker, dont get ahead of yourself

  • rotma11 on May 29, 2012, 22:20 GMT

    Are you crazy!?... Where as we can agree that England has a good bowling attack, they're no way in the league of that Aus bowling attack. First of all that Aus team has in it two legends of the game in Warne and McGarth and Brett Lee if not for injury would still be a formidable bowler as he has shown in the IPL. I think credit must be given to England for the strides they have made but as usua,l a little success and English heads swell with disillusion of grandeur!

  • srivatsan on May 29, 2012, 22:15 GMT

    ROFL, pls add Curtly Ambrose, Joel Garner and Marshall too. In fact Anderson taught these guys how to bowl.

  • on May 29, 2012, 22:11 GMT

    darren sammy scored a century against tis england attack..ha ha ha

  • Behind_the_bowlers_arm on May 29, 2012, 22:03 GMT

    England have a good effective attack that have worked well together but the figures in the box tell the tale of any comparison. The great (i'm using the word in its correct context here) Australians have THREE times the wickets of the England group. Swann would have to play into his 70's to get near Warne's wicket total. I note that the 668 Test wickets taken by the England quartet is 70 short of 4 men called Steyn (272) Morkel (139) Kallis (276) & , from 7 Tests , Philander (51).

  • 512fm on May 29, 2012, 22:02 GMT

    You have got to be kidding me, they aren't even the best test bowling attack! I'll have Steyn, Morkel, Philander and Tahir anyday. Also lets wait and see them against India in India (I'm not even an Indian fan).

  • sk12 on May 29, 2012, 22:00 GMT

    @hhhillbumper - more pertinently, this comes from the Eng bowling coach as against from an Aussie. Agreed they have done pretty good last couple of years, but let them continue similarly till the end of this decade, then we can compare them with Mcgrath and Warne.

  • teo. on May 29, 2012, 22:00 GMT

    Ofcourse and English bowling coach would say something like that about the bowlers he coaches. I'm quite sure Warne and McGrath never lost to Pakistan in a series??

  • on May 29, 2012, 21:55 GMT

    Is Dobell serious, come on! Comparing two of the best of all time to the current England bowlers is a joke, they are ok bowlers but certainly in no way should they even be mentioned in the same sentence with Warne and Mcgrath who took 708 and 563 wickets respectively. Currently what i see is poor West Indian batting and good bowling; not great bowling by England

  • JohnRoberts on May 29, 2012, 21:54 GMT

    "big mouthed Englishmen at it again"

    Erm . . . big-mouthed Australian, surely.

  • tests_the_best on May 29, 2012, 21:53 GMT

    Agree with Riingo and JezNorth that this eng attack is great depth-wise and also it's more apt to compare it with mcdermott-hughes. I would say the combination of anderson/broad/swann is a couple of notches below the combination of wasim/waqar/qadir. But considering how much all the english bowlers have improved over the last 2 or so years, they might yet become a great attack, still early to call though.

  • on May 29, 2012, 21:49 GMT

    McGrath & Warne never lost 3-0 to Pakistan!

  • tests_the_best on May 29, 2012, 21:33 GMT

    One thing I am impressed with this English attack over the great australian attack is the bench strength but there certainly is no 'wow' factor as was associated with mcgrath-warne. even during the great aussie era, they were quite vulnerable without those 2. in the 2005 ashes which eng won 2-1, mcgrath missed 2 out of 5 matches which were precisely the ones that england won. same for the 2003-04 home series against india, no mcgrath-warne and they could only draw 1-1 (and nearly lost) against ind at home. so england have better bench strength but that's about it, mcgrath-warne hands down better than any combination of the present eng attack.

  • S.N.Singh on May 29, 2012, 21:31 GMT

    MR.DOBELL, I THINK A LEG-SPINNER IS NEEDED IN THE ENGLISH SIDE. THIS WILL MAKE THE GAME EASIER FOR THE ENGLISH TEAM. LEG-SPINNER IN ENGLAND IS ALWAYS DANGEROUS ESPECIALLY TO THESE TYPE OF BATSMEN. I TOLD YOU BEFORE THAT ENGLAND WILL WIN THE SERIES. S.N.SINGH U.S.A. HOPE YOU POSI MY COMMENT.

  • Ashu_CricketFan on May 29, 2012, 21:22 GMT

    Looks like its always (Eng + SA) 11 vs any team. So how does england get to be No.1 ranked test team? it should be Eng + SA right?

  • landl47 on May 29, 2012, 21:13 GMT

    Warne was the best bowler I have ever seen, seam or spin. McGrath was in the very top drawer. I can't think of another combination of seamer and spinner that I would rate as highly in my time watching cricket. Wes Hall and Lance Gibbs might be closest. Anderson and Swann are very good, but not quite at that level in my view. However, if an Australian thinks they are that good, then maybe I'm wrong!

  • KingOwl on May 29, 2012, 21:10 GMT

    Oh, here we go again... This is pathetic. Why do English always seem to praise their own these days? It's really lowly behavior. Aren't English supposed to be a bit more sophisticated? Let others do the praising - if the English are so good, the rest of the world will pay respect. We didn't like the Aussies. We didn't even respect them. But, we knew they were good. England, if they are great, we will respect them because people like Strauss are good blokes (these stupid comments that appear all too frequently in the media really spoils it for decent guys like Strauss).

  • Stark62 on May 29, 2012, 21:09 GMT

    LOL

    Swann struggled to pick up wickets in UAE (bar Taufeeq, who is hopeless) and only got wickets against SL because most of their batsmen were out of form.

    We all know, that Pak batsmen are like sitting ducks against pace, hence why English fast men were able to get wickets and against SL, the same reason Swann got wickets.

  • on May 29, 2012, 21:07 GMT

    hmmm, very funny, but these are the mind games that is the norm these days, deflate the windies and wind up the springboks coming next!! remember the tours to aus in their heydays, this will begin to look similar, spewing venom is good against such comments, but no harm talking up your own bowlers. and no matter what anyone says, given that he cant bowl doosras, swann is the most beautiful off spinner in the world today, though saeed ajmal is a more potent weapon! the mystery of flight and dip is fantastic, ask any spin lover!! anderson is also a good bowler and is always improving!! however, the best english bowler by far is broad

  • IndiaNumeroUno on May 29, 2012, 21:06 GMT

    hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

  • Rizz11 on May 29, 2012, 21:00 GMT

    Ha ha hahahahahahah......Mcgrath and Warne VS Anderson and Swann u got to be kidding....Mcgrath and Warne won matches for their teams all over the world Including India..Pakistan Srilanka...I think English bowlers are decent bowlers and are very dangerous in English conditions but to prove urslef great u need to perform every where. Some one was saying that they did a decent job in UAE against PAK but Pak batting is the weakest among the top 6 test playing nations. I wish if Mohammed Yusuf was playing that series. The real test will start when they will play India in India I wish them luck as dravid is retired from cricket and most of new batsmen are busy in making money in IPL rather then getting test cap....

  • on May 29, 2012, 20:59 GMT

    Best Bowling attack?? Remember Australian attack performed all around the world but this England attack was made to cry in the sub-continent. Comparison is naive and laughable.. HeHe

  • allblue on May 29, 2012, 20:49 GMT

    Come on people, don't upset yourselves, seriously. Coaches talk their players up, that's what they do, it's called psychology. Modern journalism mainly consists of bi-polar hyperbole designed to provoke a reaction, it's called click-bait. McGrath and Warne were two of the greatest bowlers ever to play the game, no-one in this England side, certainly at this stage in their careers, can match them. Saker knows that, so does anyone else who knows anything about cricket. I would say that the only bowler around that comes close is Steyn, although on current form Anderson is pushing him. Along with that craftsmen at the top of his game England have an excellent bowling unit that work hard for each other and for the last couple of years have had tremendous success together, but I'm sure any sane man would rather face them than Roberts, Holding, Marshall and Garner. This sort of hype is only going to increase before the SA series which promises so much. Just relax and enjoy it is my advice.

  • richardror on May 29, 2012, 20:41 GMT

    Laughing at all Australian fans who are grabbing at the only time they had a decent team and now it's beaten (easily). This article was written by an aussie and quoted an ausse who said it. Swann, Anderson, Broad, Onions, Finn, Bresnan undoubtedly the top 6 bowlers of all time. No one is better than any of them.

  • richardror on May 29, 2012, 20:38 GMT

    the australian attack does not compare to englands attack today.. as soon as england mustered together a half decent team (2005 ashes) they were thoroughly annihilated. No country comes close to England's immense dominance today. They will never lose a test match for the next 10 years. Lol.

  • 5wombats on May 29, 2012, 20:35 GMT

    @Spelele; "people wonder why most knowledgeable cricket fans don't take this English side seriously". Rubbish. This bowling group is the reason why England are currently world number 1. The facts are that this bowling group have proved time and again that they can put their team into match winning positions on any surface in the world - just as did Lee and friends before. The England bowlers can hardly be blamed if their batsman cannot go on to bat England to victories (ie in UAE). The defeat in the UAE was only Englands second away series defeat since India in 2008 (the other being the infamous West Indies 51 job in 2009). England's home record is fantastic and its away record, which includes a comprehensive demolition of Australia in 2010/11 is very good - built on outstanding bowling. @Spelele our advice would be; deal in facts. That way your comments might be taken more seriously. If I were a saffer I'd be looking at England's home record and comparing it to South Africa's.....

  • cabinet96 on May 29, 2012, 20:30 GMT

    Some of these comments are dire to say the least. Obviously the English attack isn't as good as the Australian one yet, but to sight their batting woes in Asia as a reason for their bowling being poor is ridiculous. No Australia didn't get whitewashed in Asia, but they had the advantage of Hayden, Gilchrist, Ponting, Waugh etc...It seems some people on here are just wanting to slag off the English test side for whatever reason, even if it's got no relevance to the article. I mean where in the article does it say England are even a good team? Let alone one of the best ever? More back to the point; I really don't know how people are calling this attack only good in English conditions. Did they not watch the series in Sri Lanka and the UAE?

  • Nadeem1976 on May 29, 2012, 20:26 GMT

    Send this bowling attack to UAE against pakistan and then we will see how good they are. Australians destroyed pakistan two times for 54 all out in two tests in UAE in 2002 . This attack is not that good at all. You can not compare or replace Shane Warne with swan or any other spinner ever. I don't believe that this england attack is world class at all. SA attack is best in the world and they will show this summer in eng.

  • JG2704 on May 29, 2012, 20:24 GMT

    @Spelele on (May 29 2012, 19:00 PM GMT) Agreed the article is OTT but saying "Any attack that allows Sammy to score a ton is average" - I'm guessing by the same token you'd say that any attack who can't defent a total of 300+ on their home turf , having the away side 165-5 is pretty mediocre too. Or any attack who can't even win a test series at home to India at the moment must be woeful. I don't buy into that either and fully respect the SA bowling unit/side. How about a little respect for a change?

  • pardo on May 29, 2012, 20:24 GMT

    It's not that out there. The total wickets is an irrelevant comparison - you're comparing guys who finished their careers with guys who could play for another 5 to 10 years. Secondly look at Broad and Anderson's records over the last 24 months - Jimmy 24 tests 111 wickets at 24, Broad 19 games 78 wickets at 23 - that compares pretty well. I don't think they're good as McGrath and Warne, but as a group of four I'd say they are on a par

  • Valavan on May 29, 2012, 20:22 GMT

    Take a break guys. Its Saker's personal comments. Its the same when you guys, especially Indian fans say Zaheer Khan is more accurate than Anderson, Vaas etc. Its his personal opinion, so there the story ends, seems England forums attract more Indians, that shows England is a class ahead of current crop teams. Losses against pakistan is mainly due to batting failure. so keep it simple, He says it reminds him McGrath and Warne, ofcourse then in 2001, Aussie pace battery was compared to Windies ones, where did all these yawners gone then, at current , england has the variety, of course many can say SA attack blah blah, well SA doesnt have a decent spinner like Swann. Keep it simple, In 2000s Aussie pace battery looked like Windies of 80s, yet they proved it in the years after 2001, now this lineup of england compared, lets wait and see if english crop justifies that, instead dont yawn unnecessarily. cricinfo please publish

  • on May 29, 2012, 20:21 GMT

    I would love to hear his comments if South Africa manages to draw the upcoming test series with England or even beat them.

  • Midonoff on May 29, 2012, 20:19 GMT

    England needs to go on a good run to be classed as great, great team, that means to stay as world no.1 for aa good number of years. When West Indies and Australia were dominating they use to put teams to the sword. In my opinion England just barely brush off West Indies in these two test matches, hardly a world beater. Where was the 600/3 declared etc. that some fans were hoping for agaiants a rank 7/8 team. I wouldn't rate the England bowling attack as good as , as McGrath and Shane Warne etc. maybe in a couple of years time if they continue to do well. England needs to put away lower rank teams convincely, which not happening at the moment. Aslso,they need to perform well away from home as well, and in all formats of the game not just test matches. Australia and West Indies had very good Test and ODI''s teams and they won the world cup to show too.

  • Trickstar on May 29, 2012, 20:18 GMT

    I agree with some there's no need to go here, just opens yourselves up to all the rubbish that's been put in the comments section by the haters. Got to say those that bring this winter up and the tests that England lost can't have watched any of them because the England attack was awesome on those foreign decks, the pace attack bowled better than many thought possible. Broad in the UAE and Anderson in SL bowled as well as anyone has in those countries, unbelievable effort it was, shame the batsmen didn't show up because the bowlers put England into positions to to win all the tests they lost.

  • Mattzo12 on May 29, 2012, 20:17 GMT

    I like how people forge that David Saker is an Australian who worked with the Australian attack of old. People are also forgetting that the bowlers didn't fail abroad, just the batsmen.

  • on May 29, 2012, 20:11 GMT

    LOL.

    Warne is in a different league of his own. As is McGrath. Comparing anyone to them is a mistake.

  • Trickstar on May 29, 2012, 20:11 GMT

    @Saffie1987 I think the only person that needs a reality check is you bud if you think England are going to play second fiddle to your lot,. They'll do their usual come over with their big reputations but end o=up choking like they always do, how can yo take a side that serious who's only won one home series in 3 years, you can't ridiculous outfit. The one thing I agree with is the headlines have been daft recently, thing is when you read the articles they don't really represent the headline on show. I agree with a lot of what Saker says about the attacks, especially whe he talks about the pressure they apply to get wickets and the stats for the last 3 years mirror the great Aus attack but England need another few years of performing like they have been doing with the ball to be in the same ballpark. Some of these comments though, didn't they watch England bowl this winter, they were excellent, it was the batting that was rubbish and let them down,

  • JG2704 on May 29, 2012, 20:10 GMT

    Definitely an overstatement but re our bowling unit. I'm very happy with it - even if I thing our best chance vs SA is with a 5 man bowling attack.To those who say about the recent SC tours - Yes the UAE/Pak tour was awful but our bowlers were not the ones who failed.Let's see how they continue to perform and then maybe compare some years down the line.

  • DoubleKickDrum on May 29, 2012, 20:10 GMT

    This England attack would be similar if you took either McGrath or Warne or both out but as it is don't quite measure up. There are a few comments about Anderson and Broad averaging over 30. True, but those averages have continued to improve. Of course no bowling line up matches the Windies in the early eighties. Marshall and Garner at 21 runs per wicket, Holding at 23 and Roberts at 25 and all lightning fast. In comparison, facing Jason Gillespie or Jimmy Anderson is a bit of light relief.

  • on May 29, 2012, 20:09 GMT

    and to all those about the English sub-continent tour? when did the bowling let us down? Go and watch those test matches again and tell me where, when and how the bowling let us down? Only time Pakistan batsmen got away was in the third test when it was already over, Khan and Ali tons, otherwise, it was like watching an English team from the 90s batting and losing games from winnable positions (72 all out chasing 145, etc.)

  • on May 29, 2012, 20:05 GMT

    If Anderson, Broad and Bresnan can finish their careers ( test and ODIs included) anywhere better than Brett Lee and Gillespie, England will be well served. Let's not even talk about McGrath or Warne. None, I repeat NONE of the present English crop of that level of skill. Forget Warne, Swann doesn't have the skills to trump Ajmal in Asian conditions, and doesn't even half the number of Test wickets as Harbhajan Singh (who is probably the only non great in 400+ club). As for Anderson, and the rest, let them first get to Beefy's tally first ( and that man scored 14 test centuries too, just in case Saker doesn't remember). Only Broad, if he can keep form and fitness intact, and temper in control, has any chance of becoming an all-time great.

  • JG2704 on May 29, 2012, 20:03 GMT

    @Tlotoxl on (May 29 2012, 17:34 PM GMT) Like any of the snipers are going to take notice of your research

  • on May 29, 2012, 20:03 GMT

    you guys can all laugh but the comments are designed to make the bowling attack feel they are on top of the world (which they are at the moment), and to try and sow a seed of doubt in the Saffers minds ahead of the new series. I don't believe they are as good as McGrath or Warne either, but have any of you who have had a rage or sulk at Saker's comments heard of mind games?

  • JG2704 on May 29, 2012, 20:01 GMT

    @James Trumpet Bertrand on (May 29 2012, 17:33 PM GMT) This is purely about the bowling unit if you actually bother reading the article

  • MrBrightside92 on May 29, 2012, 20:00 GMT

    I have no problem if visiting teams don't take us seriously....if that's the case...good mind games Mr Saker...Sir Alex Ferguson would be proud...I never understood this whole comparison thing anyway...you can't compare eras or even players..who would win between the Windies of the 70's/80's...vs Australia 90's/00's...who cares? It's such a waste of peoples time (like commenting on this article...)...I see Alec Stewarts picking his XI...naming Wasim Akram...to play who exactly? Anderson could be the most average bowler of all time but as long as he gets Sangakarra or POnting out first ball I don't really care..now if he could just do it to Kallis a few times....

  • JG2704 on May 29, 2012, 19:56 GMT

    @Vikash Vaibhaw on (May 29 2012, 17:03 PM GMT) Vs Pak our batting was the problem. If they performed we'd have won 2 of those tests. Vs SL we drew 1-1 with out batsmen again letting us down in the 1st match. 1-1 isn'y a trashing is it?

  • AlexPG on May 29, 2012, 19:56 GMT

    I think Saker makes an interesting pouint. If you consider the period that he has been coach for then yes, the English attack has been of similar potency to the great Australian attack. Admittedly for nowhere near as long as McGrath and Warne ruled the world.

    And for those pointing out that England lost in Pakistan in the winter....well you either have short memories or no understanding of cricket. England's bowling attack was formidable in that series, with Swann, Anderson, Broad and Panesar all averaging under 28 with the ball. It was England's batting that was the let down not the bowling.

  • MCC_Tie on May 29, 2012, 19:45 GMT

    And there South Africa is keeping a lid on boasting about an attack that includes Steyn, Philander, Morkel and Kallis. You're having a laugh.

  • on May 29, 2012, 19:39 GMT

    Anderson 9 @27.60 UAE 9@21.77 Sri Lanka Swann 13@25.07 UAE 16@22.18 Sri Lanka Broad 13@ 20.46 UAE Injured after first test in Sri Lanka Panesar 14 @ 21.57 UAE Only one game in Sri Lanka Finn played one game in Sri Lanka took 3 for 80 odd. Laugh it up. It is the BATTING that is terrible in the sub continental conditions.

  • The_bowlers_Holding on May 29, 2012, 19:39 GMT

    As usual there is a plethora of fans from the sub continent with their usual bla bla blah insular diatribe (mainly Indian), in the UAE and SL the England bowlers were excellent-look at the match stats, it was the batsmen who were pants and my where they pants. If Saker had been comparing the England bowlers to Wasim, Waqar Quadir then again I would doubt the credibility or the great Indian bowlers like you know......This is a article designed to get a reaction and I think it has succeeded, personally I think Finn will be the next big thing but who do you drop, just don't get injured (Tremlett).

  • 2.14istherunrate on May 29, 2012, 19:39 GMT

    @hhhillbumper: 'jonesey2 will be having a fit....'- give us another laugh and add randyoz. Those two cricketing experts are well revered for their observa-tions-haha!! You guys may have had good bowlers but the old grey matter seems a little thin on the ground.

  • Lara213 on May 29, 2012, 19:36 GMT

    Take out Warne and McGrath and I'd agree. The statistics show they're in the same league as Brett and Gillespie, but so are lots of bowlers. A fairer comparison would be with the pre-Warne, Allan Border attack, McDermott, Alderman, Merv Hughes and Reid. I would actually argue that England's 2005 4-pack Flintoff, Jones, Hoggard and Harmison at its best was more potent than today's attack.

    Warne and Mcgrath belong in the pantheon of the game's all-time bowling combinations: Lillee and Thommo, Waqar and Wasim, Ambrose and Walsh, Holding and Garner.

  • The_bowlers_Holding on May 29, 2012, 19:29 GMT

    I am an England fan and think this attack, and the players in reserve, is the best England attack depth wise and consistency while I have been watching (33 years). But to compare to McGrath and Warne is not really on, but he is the bowling coach so he is blowing his own trumpet really and given where he comes from not that suprising ;) I am really looking forward to the SA series if it is a long hard summer I think SA may prevail but if the weather is more typical of an English summer (cold and wet) then England, but what do I know.

  • on May 29, 2012, 19:26 GMT

    It is true you can't compare the English attack to the great Australians by a long shot, but I think those of you who are laughing at England's performance against Pakistan and Sri Lanka should note that actually they bowled very, very well but were let down by the batting. The bowlers put them in winning postions more then once..

  • RahulGandhi on May 29, 2012, 19:25 GMT

    hahahaha....rolling on the floor.

  • on May 29, 2012, 19:11 GMT

    big mouthed Englishmen at it again :| . I mean these good are gud.... but to be compare them to such legends is foolishness . Those two guys named proved there mettle on the soil of every freaking cricket playing nation and that too over a Decade.Please use praise with discretion .

  • jango_moh on May 29, 2012, 19:06 GMT

    "swann and anderson" like "warne and mcgrath", gimme a break!!!! the eng attack is very good, but not great by any stretch of ur imagination....

  • biggyd on May 29, 2012, 19:05 GMT

    hehe. look at those stats. even in your dreams they're half as good as mac and warne. u gunning for a raise davey?

  • on May 29, 2012, 19:02 GMT

    bwhahahahahahahahahaha .. good joke ..had a good laugh

  • Spelele on May 29, 2012, 19:00 GMT

    Hahaha lol! I can't stop laughing at these ridiculous comments. And people wonder why most knowledgeable cricket fans don't take this English side seriously. So much needless gloating! Anyone who starts being compared to the great Australian line-up should be scrutinized (and should take all the flack flowing therefrom). As much as I enjoyed the joke, surely it is an insult to compare this lot to Warne etal. There are times when this attack looks FLAT at best. Any attack that allows Sammy to score a ton is average, never mind comparing it to any great attacks of the past! There is a reason why 2 of these ENG bowlers average 30 (and one of them just short of 30), while the AUS bowlers all average 26 or less save for Lee whose average just touches 30 (but who was always more dangerous than both Anderson and Broad!). There clearly is no comparison here!!!?

  • Spelele on May 29, 2012, 19:00 GMT

    Hahaha lol! I can't stop laughing at these ridiculous comments. And people wonder why most knowledgeable cricket fans don't take this English side seriously. So much needless gloating! Anyone who starts being compared to the great Australian line-up should be scrutinized (and should take all the flack flowing therefrom). As much as I enjoyed the joke, surely it is an insult to compare this lot to Warne etal. There are times when this attack looks FLAT at best. Any attack that allows Sammy to score a ton is average, never mind comparing it to any great attacks of the past! There is a reason why 2 of these ENG bowlers average 30 (and one of them just short of 30), while the AUS bowlers all average 26 or less save for Lee whose average just touches 30 (but who was always more dangerous than both Anderson and Broad!). There clearly is no comparison here!!!?

  • on May 29, 2012, 18:58 GMT

    Dear Australian fans, I apologise for some of the vacuous hyperbole coming out of those following and supporting England right now.

  • on May 29, 2012, 18:53 GMT

    "Saker has been particularly impressed with the bowlers' ability to adapt to conditions as required" - really??? adapting to english conditions...... lol

    What happened in Asian conditions??? England were brought to their knees by Pakistan in a neutral venue......!! Please donot insult the great Mcgrath and Warne.... please.....

  • PunchDrunkPunter on May 29, 2012, 18:51 GMT

    Saker is bang on the money. McGrath and Warne aren't as good as Jimmy and Swanny.

  • on May 29, 2012, 18:48 GMT

    This is an overstatement if I ever heard one.

  • billy_bilal on May 29, 2012, 18:40 GMT

    He must be kidding. Don't get me wrong, Swan and Anderson are great bowlers but you can't possibly compare them with aussie legends especially Warne. There has never been a better spinner in the history of cricket and Swan is not even number 1 spinner in the world at the moment. Saeed Ajmal beaten him hands down in test series with Pakistan. I would say Swan is extremely effective against left handers but not so much against right handers.

  • on May 29, 2012, 18:39 GMT

    It is good Saker knows which side of his bread is buttered..but comparing the English bowlers with Aussies is just that...Swann is not even in the same class as Warne, he does not have the magic Warne did....Anderson is good but he is no McGrath. McGrath performed even on dirt tracks of Asia and we can seen what the current bunch could achieve in Asia...so pipe it down Saker

  • bonaku on May 29, 2012, 18:38 GMT

    No one in the proper state of mind will say that. This english attak havn't proven any thing. Why to boost like this.

  • Saffie1987 on May 29, 2012, 18:34 GMT

    You must be joking! hahahahahahhahahahahahahaahahahahhahaha

  • hhillbumper on May 29, 2012, 18:24 GMT

    Jonesey 2 will be having a fit and more funny as this comes from an Aussie

  • on May 29, 2012, 18:19 GMT

    what a joke..!! best attack only in england not in subcontinent...!!! couldn win test series againt pak n sl still compared to mcgarth n warne lolz..i guess if am not wrong both mcgrath warne n co had won series not oly in subcontinent but erever they played so they wer great bowlers..pls stop england bowlers to tat mighty aussie team bowler who won every series

  • Andy1102 on May 29, 2012, 18:15 GMT

    The memory loss surrounding the current english team and their press stooges is just staggering to say the least. It actually beggars belief. Now that they're beating the West Indies (with all due respect, the West Indies!) on home turf the memories of the last 4 months have been wiped clean and they're the greatest cricket team to have ever graced the hallowed cricket turf. The arrogance is sickening.

  • Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas on May 29, 2012, 18:14 GMT

    I'm glad at least he didn't compare this set of English bowlers to the great West Indian pace battery.

  • on May 29, 2012, 18:14 GMT

    Oh yeah... the 3-0 loss to Pakistan on slow track pretty much proves David Saker's theory on the bowling attack. We'll again get a demonstration of the powerful bowling attack when they play 4 tests and the never ending series in India (Oct to Jan), the most boring , one sided 4 months of cricket

  • wiseshah on May 29, 2012, 18:10 GMT

    i think england have best test bowling, plus their batting is also strong. they truly deserve number 1 ranking in test cricket

  • on May 29, 2012, 18:07 GMT

    Don't make me laugh... you can't compare the two at all, even statistically (huge gulf in the averages and number of wickets taken as shown above). It's just a lot of chest beating nonsense. They aren't even the best attack in world cricket currently (SA's quicks have vastly better averages). Next they will be saying they're the equal of the great West Indies 80's pace attacks.

  • Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas on May 29, 2012, 17:59 GMT

    Wow two wins against the Windies and people are going bonkers. This is insane I say.

  • bestbuddy on May 29, 2012, 17:50 GMT

    I believe the expression "LOL" is appropriate for this article right now...when anderson and swann both have 500 test wickets we'll revisit this joke of a statement

  • gmoturu1 on May 29, 2012, 17:49 GMT

    England need to start looking for the next spinner as Swann is 33. He has maybe 4 years left in him and england without a good spinner would struggle in sub continent. (they are already struggling now). no problem with their pace battery. It would be interesting to watch Vernon Philander vs England. Mind you SA bowling attack is way better than England's.

  • Saffie1987 on May 29, 2012, 17:46 GMT

    Hahaha i'm sorry to burst your bubble, but it seems that some journalist and some people from the England Camp need to get a reality Check!!!!! This England attack isn't even the best in the world, let alone being compared to the great aussie attack!!! This is some good comic relief, good job on that!!!! Can't wait for Sa to give the English a hiding, gonna be so much fun to see how de Villiers and Amla smash Anderson and Broad around the park!!!! England is a great team, but second fiddle to Sa!!!!

  • on May 29, 2012, 17:45 GMT

    Let them succeed outside England first then you guys can start to compare. Right now they are just Lions at home nothing else.

  • Jstreeter on May 29, 2012, 17:43 GMT

    Is Saker here actually saying that the current England attack is as good as the Australian attack of the early 2000s, or that he has seen some spells that are as good? Because it is surely preposterous to suggest the former. Swann is a good off spinner, but Warne is almost certainly the greatest leg spinner of all time, and a clear candidate for best bowler of all time. Likewise Anderson is a good swing bowler, but McGrath is one of the best fast medium seam bowlers of all time. Maybe I'm ungenerous, but there does seem to be a lot of hyperbole about this current England team.

  • Naren on May 29, 2012, 17:41 GMT

    It is a joke. This England team performs only in their back yard. How can they be compared to the Australian team with McGrath and Warne in it ??

  • kitten on May 29, 2012, 17:38 GMT

    While we all appreciate that England do have a formidable bowling attack, they have yet to perform in India, and be successful, which McGrath did. Also remember Warne was not so successful and so was Swann recently in the ODIs. I know some of you will say that England were good in SL, but look at the team they were facing, with the exception of MJ, Dilshan, Sanga and Mathews, all the others are very inexperienced. Compared to them, India has a formidable batting order(in their own conditions), and I am pretty sure England will be made to struggle to get wickets over there. If they are successful, and I hope they are, then we can all proclaim them to be truly world #1 Test Team. Until and unless that happens, most people will say that they are 'tigers' in their own backyard. However, a true test is looming in the forthcoming series against the South Africans, and that will prove how good this team is. WI were only there to whet the appetite.

  • Tlotoxl on May 29, 2012, 17:34 GMT

    It has to be pointed out Andersons average in the last 2 years is 22.9 and Broads is 24.3, both started of rather wayward and expensive but are fast becoming exceptional and these are against the supposedly fearsome Indian batting lineup, Home & away against SL and Pakistan and away in Aus...

  • on May 29, 2012, 17:33 GMT

    This is ridiculous. Respect to England team but mind that they were whitewashed by a fledgling Pakistan team.

  • on May 29, 2012, 17:33 GMT

    What is going on here? Why is everyone saying this England team is one of the greatest of ALL-TIME? Let's wait three more years and then tell. Even three more months til after the SA series.

  • wiseguy101 on May 29, 2012, 17:26 GMT

    oh yeah here we go, the usual by Dobell 1+1=11. just wait for the South Africans to arrive then we'll see what'll happen.

  • mk49_van on May 29, 2012, 17:22 GMT

    what a joke... McGrath and Warne did not get whipped 4-0.

  • on May 29, 2012, 17:21 GMT

    The difference between the two bowling attacks is McGrath. He was a once in a generation bowler, unless you take into account the time when the WI had about 6 'once in a generation' fast bowlers...

  • wrenx on May 29, 2012, 17:19 GMT

    It seems like the English press will never learn that no matter how much they try to feed it to us, no-one's buying the comparison. The stats alone show the gulf between the Australian side and England's pedestrian unit. And let's not forget McGrath actually lifted a world cup trophy on more than one occasion, unlike 1-format Anderson. If I were Australian, I'd be insulted by the comparison

  • SamAsh07 on May 29, 2012, 17:19 GMT

    I'll agree about Broad, he is sensational. Rest of them are so-so.

  • on May 29, 2012, 17:17 GMT

    One word - facepalm......

  • on May 29, 2012, 17:16 GMT

    Can we please get over ourselves here, Mcgrath and Warne did not lose 3-0 abroad when they were number 1. Self imposed Amnesia I suppose. The winter never happened probably for these folks. They are a good bowling side, lets leave it at that.

  • AJ_Tiger86 on May 29, 2012, 17:15 GMT

    England's current bowling attack is FAR better than the old Australian attack. We have more variety and better backups. Also man-for-man, current England bowlers are way ahead of the Australian bowlers of the last decade.

  • Indiaforever on May 29, 2012, 17:12 GMT

    I don't really think you can compare the attacks yet, give it another year or two and if they carry on doing very well then yeah but atm you cant.

  • Rally_Windies on May 29, 2012, 17:09 GMT

    so all England needs now is a "Ricky Pointing" and a "Gilchrist".....

    Pointing averaged over 60, for a 6 year period......

    and you also need a Mathew Hayden ....

    Unlike the great WI teams that had "good" batting but awesome bowling units....

    Mc Grath, Lee, Gillespie, Warne .. (with Rifel and Mc Gill as back ups) .... were not a super dominant bowling attack .....

    Austrailia's batting was DOMINANT .... largely because of Pointing, Wuagh, Hayden and Gilchrist. (and Warne was a mighty handy #7)..

    apart from cook and peiterson , the rest of the batting does not compare ...Prior is not Gilchrist (though competent), Straus is not Wuagh.....

    and neither cook nor peiterson can fill in Pointing's shoes ....

    nope.. even if the bowling is comparable, the batting is not ........

  • AndyZaltzmannsHair on May 29, 2012, 17:04 GMT

    This silliness must be stopped at once.

  • on May 29, 2012, 17:04 GMT

    If England have any sense, they'll offer him a nice contract, rather than dither and let him leave like they did with Troy Cooley.

  • on May 29, 2012, 17:03 GMT

    such a great attack that you always got trashed in Asian conditions on regular basis.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • on May 29, 2012, 17:03 GMT

    such a great attack that you always got trashed in Asian conditions on regular basis.

  • on May 29, 2012, 17:04 GMT

    If England have any sense, they'll offer him a nice contract, rather than dither and let him leave like they did with Troy Cooley.

  • AndyZaltzmannsHair on May 29, 2012, 17:04 GMT

    This silliness must be stopped at once.

  • Rally_Windies on May 29, 2012, 17:09 GMT

    so all England needs now is a "Ricky Pointing" and a "Gilchrist".....

    Pointing averaged over 60, for a 6 year period......

    and you also need a Mathew Hayden ....

    Unlike the great WI teams that had "good" batting but awesome bowling units....

    Mc Grath, Lee, Gillespie, Warne .. (with Rifel and Mc Gill as back ups) .... were not a super dominant bowling attack .....

    Austrailia's batting was DOMINANT .... largely because of Pointing, Wuagh, Hayden and Gilchrist. (and Warne was a mighty handy #7)..

    apart from cook and peiterson , the rest of the batting does not compare ...Prior is not Gilchrist (though competent), Straus is not Wuagh.....

    and neither cook nor peiterson can fill in Pointing's shoes ....

    nope.. even if the bowling is comparable, the batting is not ........

  • Indiaforever on May 29, 2012, 17:12 GMT

    I don't really think you can compare the attacks yet, give it another year or two and if they carry on doing very well then yeah but atm you cant.

  • AJ_Tiger86 on May 29, 2012, 17:15 GMT

    England's current bowling attack is FAR better than the old Australian attack. We have more variety and better backups. Also man-for-man, current England bowlers are way ahead of the Australian bowlers of the last decade.

  • on May 29, 2012, 17:16 GMT

    Can we please get over ourselves here, Mcgrath and Warne did not lose 3-0 abroad when they were number 1. Self imposed Amnesia I suppose. The winter never happened probably for these folks. They are a good bowling side, lets leave it at that.

  • on May 29, 2012, 17:17 GMT

    One word - facepalm......

  • SamAsh07 on May 29, 2012, 17:19 GMT

    I'll agree about Broad, he is sensational. Rest of them are so-so.

  • wrenx on May 29, 2012, 17:19 GMT

    It seems like the English press will never learn that no matter how much they try to feed it to us, no-one's buying the comparison. The stats alone show the gulf between the Australian side and England's pedestrian unit. And let's not forget McGrath actually lifted a world cup trophy on more than one occasion, unlike 1-format Anderson. If I were Australian, I'd be insulted by the comparison