PDA

View Full Version : Next No. 1


karimjay.
January 2, 2007, 05:34 AM
As Australia lose players one by one due to an exodus, do you think that Australia will maintain there number one ranking or will another test nation take over? If so, which test nation?

I reckon there wont be an undisputed world champion in a few years, rather the number one spot shared by a number of test nations. Pakistan and Australia will be fighting for the test number one spot I think. After Australia loses Warne, Hayden, McGrath, Langer and Gilchrist(?) they will not be an extraordinary team anymore.

israr
January 2, 2007, 07:32 AM
West Indies

Carte Blanche
January 2, 2007, 09:20 AM
One reason they have been so dominant over the years is the strength of their reserves. Everytime they suffered injuries, they backup guys chipped in and filled the void perfectly. I doubt the procession of retirements will throw them into a slump. However, it does signify the end of a champion era; it will take minor rebuilding. May be they won't undisputed champions as you said, but they'll be an elite force nonetheless.

James90
January 2, 2007, 09:34 AM
Hayden
Jaques
Ponting
Hussey
Clarke
Watson
Haddin
Lee
Johnson
Clark
MacGill
---------
Rogers


Would beat any team in world cricket. Nice try though.

israr
January 2, 2007, 12:20 PM
Australia will have a steady decline as time progresses, just like the Windies in 90s. I know people will counter-reply to my statements, but time will tell everything.

Hatebreed
January 2, 2007, 12:40 PM
Aussie fans need not get emotional. Of course they still have a pool of great players and just being on the champion team gives them much confidence, but I'd like to see other teams lead for a change. It could Pak or SA, though I'd like it WI.

layperson
January 2, 2007, 04:02 PM
I predict that Australia will be going downhill from now on. Their bowling was overly dependent on warne and mcgrath. The new group of bowlers are not as good and wont be able to compete with the same intensity against other top teams. The batting is still as good but as we all know you need 20 wickets to win a test match and there is no other way to do it without good bowlers. Moreover macgill is also very old and wont be playing for more than another 2 years maximum. After that the bowling gets weaker. I think SA will come up along with Srilanka and Bangladesh in the coming years.

Tigers_eye
January 2, 2007, 04:06 PM
If only Bd had two decent pacers with 90+ decent bowling ability. Everyone would be gunning for #2 spot.

Omio
January 2, 2007, 05:02 PM
Australia will num 1 anyway,
SA will b 2..

Rabz
January 3, 2007, 04:08 AM
Australia would still retain the no 1 position, may be not in that dominating style, but still numero uno.

just think of it, who would have heard the name of some "Michael Hussey" before last year or so... now we all know what he is made of...

Australia still has got a good pool of reserver players who are capable enough to fight for this top spot they have been sitting on for last few years...

layperson
January 3, 2007, 04:13 AM
Australia would still retain the no 1 position, may be not in that dominating style, but still numero uno.

just think of it, who would have heard the name of some "Michael Hussey" before last year or so... now we all know what he is made of...

Australia still has got a good pool of reserver players who are capable enough to fight for this top spot they have been sitting on for last few years...

I for one atleast have heard about Hussey since 1998. He was always a prolific scorer and I feel the Australian selectors erred in selecting him so late. But as I said in my post batting is not the worry for Australia yet. It is their bowling that will become very weak. None of the new guys I have seen bowl are anywhere close to the people they will be replacing. Plus I think they are not that good compared to other team bowlers as well. Australia will struggle in test matches to take 20 wickets with this bowling line up unless someone completely new comes up who I have never heard of or seen,who is a bowling genious. But I dont see that happening at least not for the next few years.

karimjay.
January 3, 2007, 07:11 AM
I for one atleast have heard about Hussey since 1998. He was always a prolific scorer and I feel the Australian selectors erred in selecting him so late. But as I said in my post batting is not the worry for Australia yet. It is their bowling that will become very weak. None of the new guys I have seen bowl are anywhere close to the people they will be replacing. Plus I think they are not that good compared to other team bowlers as well. Australia will struggle in test matches to take 20 wickets with this bowling line up unless someone completely new comes up who I have never heard of or seen,who is a bowling genious. But I dont see that happening at least not for the next few years.

I agree 100% with you. Without Shane and Glenn to nail seven wickets per inning regularly and instead having players such as Ben Hilfenhaus, Dan Cullen and Nathan Hauritz trying to fill the holes created by the retiring veterans. It won't work. I've watched the above rookies play for some team and they aren't bad, just no where near the standard of McGrath and Warne.

Sovik
January 3, 2007, 04:37 PM
they still have some very good players like ponting, lee, symonds and gilli. they will dominate for few more years

AsifTheManRahman
January 3, 2007, 07:30 PM
well losing warne shouldn't be much of a problem, imo, especially when mcgill has such insane stats. however, i'm not sure what will happen to their bowling attack when he too retires in a couple of years. maybe someone else will come up to fill the gap and be equally efficient - who knows.

i do agree that losing mcgrath is a huge blow below the waist, and it will take a while before the pace attack can recover from it.

i agree with sovik, though, in that australia will probably dominate for a few more years albeit having a weakened bowling attack primarily due to their strong reserve and champion batting.

cleazer
January 5, 2007, 03:59 AM
Aussies will be #1 for a long time.
Hussey and Ponting are 2 of the best on the entire planet.
Clarke and Jaques are capable of producing lots of runs every test.
Johnson and Clark are probably better than just about any other country's bowlers. (Except for a few of the very best, like Pollock and Ntini.)

Aussies will be just fine. Their 2nd XI would win quite a few tests if they played often enough. Folks like Rogers, Haddin, Voges, Cam White, Kasprowicz, and Gillespie might not be good enough to be the #2 team on the planet, but they'd play a lot of competitive tests against all the other countries, and they'd win their share.

Xavier
January 8, 2007, 03:10 PM
I think Hayden and Gilchrist will leave at the end of next world cup, so Australia will be more weakened again... see how they will react to this loss of talents will be one of the most interesting facts of international cricket in next couple of years.

Imteaz
January 10, 2007, 04:40 AM
South Africa or Srilanka

Alien
January 11, 2007, 06:57 AM
I predict that Australia will be going downhill from now on. Their bowling was overly dependent on warne and mcgrath. The new group of bowlers are not as good and wont be able to compete with the same intensity against other top teams. The batting is still as good but as we all know you need 20 wickets to win a test match and there is no other way to do it without good bowlers. Moreover macgill is also very old and wont be playing for more than another 2 years maximum. After that the bowling gets weaker. I think SA will come up along with Srilanka and Bangladesh in the coming years.

Nah dude. I too thought that when McGrath and Warne goes off, Aussies will be in deep trouble with their bowling line up. If you seen Stuart Clarke in the Ashes, he was terrific. Theyn got Shaun Tait who got amazing speed. Bracken is always there to fill in when you need fast bowlers and Mitchell Johnson is also geared up to fill in.

As for replacing Warne, that's ofcourse tough as there is no one to fill in his shoes, but McGill is excellent spinner and did well in past. They do have a good line up even after Warne and McGrath gone.

Alien
January 11, 2007, 07:00 AM
The best thing about Australia is that they don't depend on one or two superstars so much. Everyone does the job. So they won't go down from being superpower in cricket. Maybe victories won't come so cheaply but their success will prevail.

James90
January 11, 2007, 08:05 AM
Nathan Hauritz is really quite poor. Cullen isn't a lot better. If MacGill were unavailable I'd still probably pick Cullen though. That's the big area in which Australia won't recover.

Clark has stepped up and will replace McGrath, the question in who will fill that other place then? Either replace Symonds with Watson, therefore gaining bowling strength and pick White. That way there would be two average spinners to try and cover the gap Warne has left. In not then we need another seamer. In that department there will be a lot of competition between Johnson, Tait and Hilfenhaus.

MacGill definitely has to replace Warne in the immediate future, there is simply no other option. Haddin will replace Gilchrist pretty comfortably and Rogers/Jaques will over time replace Hayden/Langer. It's the transition period that will hurt as players acclimatise to test cricket and the Warne factor won't be filled for a long time. Australia will suffer but still remain #1.

I might witness a competitive home summer for once. I just wish there was a test tomorrow.

Imteaz
January 15, 2007, 12:01 AM
I don't Think Australia will Loose Their Kingdom. It is Very Difficult for Other Countries to Beat Them. One of The major Reason is Australian Cricket System. Australia Dominate the World not only for their Team but Also Their Total Cricket System. Cricket Australia (Cricket Board) Follow such a System that is too Effective for Their Overall Performance. So I think Australia will Dominate without Mcgrath or Warne.

Good Luck Australia.

Alien
January 15, 2007, 08:54 PM
I don't Think Australia will Loose Their Kingdom. It is Very Difficult for Other Countries to Beat Them. One of The major Reason is Australian Cricket System. Australia Dominate the World not only for their Team but Also Their Total Cricket System. Cricket Australia (Cricket Board) Follow such a System that is too Effective for Their Overall Performance. So I think Australia will Dominate without Mcgrath or Warne.

Good Luck Australia.

Now You Have Spoken Like A Mature Kid. Keep Up And You'll Grow Up Fast.

Imteaz
January 15, 2007, 09:38 PM
Now You Have Spoken Like A Mature Kid. Keep Up And You'll Grow Up Fast.

Really? You are telling it because I Support Australia in this Post, Right?:) Don't Worry, You will Find lots of my Childish and Mature Post. You can tell anything. "Nephew":smug: or "Mature Kid":) .

gatekeeper
January 18, 2007, 12:59 PM
Great teams are great because they know how to utilize whatever talent they have well. They are not dependant on one single player. At any rate, Australia's reserve is better than almost all the test nation's first team. Don't see the end of their domination any time soon. Althaugh I'd love to.

karimjay.
January 19, 2007, 01:30 AM
Really? You are telling it because I Support Australia in this Post, Right?:) Don't Worry, You will Find lots of my Childish and Mature Post. You can tell anything. "Nephew":smug: or "Mature Kid":) .

I don't follow this guy